From: Takuya Yoshikawa <yoshikawa_takuya_b1@lab.ntt.co.jp>
To: Xiao Guangrong <guangrong.xiao@linux.intel.com>, pbonzini@redhat.com
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/10] KVM: x86: MMU: Add helper function to clear a bit in unsync child bitmap
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 13:02:53 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <564D49ED.3020101@lab.ntt.co.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <564D3816.8080609@linux.intel.com>
On 2015/11/19 11:46, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>> Actually, some people prefer to put braces when one of the
>> if/else-if/else cases has multiple lines. You can see
>> some examples in kernel/sched/core.c: see hrtick_start(),
>> sched_fork(), free_sched_domain().
>>
>> In our case, I thought putting braces would align the else-if
>> and else and make the code look a bit nicer, but I know this
>> may be just a matter of personal feeling.
>>
>> In short, unless the maintainer, Paolo for this file, has any
>> preference, both ways will be accepted.
>
> The reason why i pointed this out is that it is the style documented
> in Documentation/CodingStyle:
> | Do not unnecessarily use braces where a single statement will do.
> |
> | if (condition)
> | action();
> |
Ah, this is a different thing. For this case, there is a consensus
and checkpatch will complain if we don't obey the rule.
What I explained was:
if (condition) {
line1;
line2; // multiple lines
} else if {
single-line-statement; -- (*1)
} else
single-line-statement; -- (*2)
For (*1) and (*2), especially for (*1), some people put braces.
> Actually, Ingo Molnar hated this braces-style too much and blamed
> many developers who used this style (include me, that why i was
> nervous to see this style :( ).
I think he likes the coding style of kernel/sched/core.c very much,
as you know. Actually that is one reason why I took it as an example.
Let's just choose the way which Paolo prefers for this time, I don't
know which is better.
Thank you,
Takuya
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-19 4:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-12 11:48 [PATCH 00/10 V2] KVM: x86: MMU: Clean up x86's mmu code for future work Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-12 11:49 ` [PATCH 01/10] KVM: x86: MMU: Remove unused parameter of __direct_map() Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-12 11:50 ` [PATCH 02/10] KVM: x86: MMU: Add helper function to clear a bit in unsync child bitmap Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-18 2:44 ` Xiao Guangrong
2015-11-19 0:59 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-19 2:46 ` Xiao Guangrong
2015-11-19 4:02 ` Takuya Yoshikawa [this message]
2015-11-12 11:51 ` [PATCH 03/10] KVM: x86: MMU: Make mmu_set_spte() return emulate value Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-12 11:51 ` [PATCH 04/10] KVM: x86: MMU: Remove is_rmap_spte() and use is_shadow_present_pte() Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-12 11:52 ` [PATCH 05/10] KVM: x86: MMU: Use for_each_rmap_spte macro instead of pte_list_walk() Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-13 21:47 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2015-11-14 9:20 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2015-11-16 2:51 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-17 17:58 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-11-18 3:07 ` Xiao Guangrong
2015-11-12 11:53 ` [PATCH 06/10] KVM: x86: MMU: Consolidate WARN_ON/BUG_ON checks for reverse-mapped sptes Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-13 22:08 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2015-11-16 3:34 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-12 11:55 ` [PATCH 07/10] KVM: x86: MMU: Encapsulate the type of rmap-chain head in a new struct Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-18 3:21 ` Xiao Guangrong
2015-11-18 9:09 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-11-19 2:23 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-12 11:55 ` [PATCH 08/10] KVM: x86: MMU: Move initialization of parent_ptes out from kvm_mmu_alloc_page() Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-12 11:56 ` [PATCH 09/10 RFC] KVM: x86: MMU: Move parent_pte handling from kvm_mmu_get_page() to link_shadow_page() Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-12 14:27 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-11-12 17:03 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-11-13 2:15 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-13 10:51 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-11-18 3:32 ` Xiao Guangrong
2015-11-12 11:57 ` [PATCH 10/10] KVM: x86: MMU: Remove unused parameter parent_pte from kvm_mmu_get_page() Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-12 12:08 ` [PATCH 00/10 V2] KVM: x86: MMU: Clean up x86's mmu code for future work Paolo Bonzini
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=564D49ED.3020101@lab.ntt.co.jp \
--to=yoshikawa_takuya_b1@lab.ntt.co.jp \
--cc=guangrong.xiao@linux.intel.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome