On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 01:13:46PM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote:

Have you run checkpatch on a tree with this patch applied? If not, then
yes, it's undocumented as the docs are added with this patch.

Aha, I'm usually running checkpatch on the patch itself so if this patch
adds it then checkpatch is doing it wrong. Oh well.

I never heard of such a requirement. How is the length defined? Is it
only the length of the variable name or is it the length of the name
including the type? Including the array braces [] or not?

The total textual length.

 What if a variable shall be initialized with the value of an earlier
declared variable, do I have to make up variable names with a suitable
length in that case?

In that case you should order it so that the initialization is correct.

What if shorter_var_name and even_shorter are of same type, can I
still write them in a single line?

You simply sort them so that it remains a reversed xmas tree.

Finally, Is this documented somewhere?

No, would it make any difference if it were?

I hope that was a joke from you that I didn't understand.

This is the convention that is used in the tip tree and I'm using it in
the EDAC tree too. Just think of it as a subsystem formatting rule.

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel