Re: [PATCH 29/29] tools: Avoid comma separated statements
From: Thomas Renninger <trenn@suse.com>
Date: 2020-08-26 09:30:20
Also in:
linux-kselftest, linux-pm
Hi, getting rid of lines with multiple instructions, separated by comma is certainly a good idea. One nit pick, though: Am Dienstag, 25. August 2020, 06:56:26 CEST schrieb Joe Perches:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Use semicolons and braces. Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> --- tools/lib/subcmd/help.c | 10 +- tools/power/cpupower/utils/cpufreq-set.c | 14 +- tools/testing/selftests/vm/gup_benchmark.c | 18 +- tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c | 296 +++++++++++++-------- 4 files changed, 210 insertions(+), 128 deletions(-)diff --git a/tools/lib/subcmd/help.c b/tools/lib/subcmd/help.c index 2859f107abc8..bf02d62a3b2b 100644 --- a/tools/lib/subcmd/help.c +++ b/tools/lib/subcmd/help.c@@ -65,12 +65,14 @@ void exclude_cmds(struct cmdnames *cmds, struct cmdnames*excludes) ci = cj = ei = 0; while (ci < cmds->cnt && ei < excludes->cnt) { cmp = strcmp(cmds->names[ci]->name, excludes->names[ei]->name); - if (cmp < 0) + if (cmp < 0) { cmds->names[cj++] = cmds->names[ci++]; - else if (cmp == 0) - ci++, ei++; - else if (cmp > 0) + } else if (cmp == 0) { + ci++; ei++; + } else if (cmp > 0) { + ei++; + } }
I can remember patches being rejected with one line statements in a condition,
surounded by braces.
I just read up Documentation/process/coding-style.rst, to be sure this still is up-to-date.
It's not a must, but line 180 says:
"Do not unnecessarily use braces where a single statement will do."
So if this is about coding style cleanup, IMO you should remove braces from single line
statements.
I haven't reviewed every line, but I expect you only split up comma separated instructions
into separate lines and added braces?
Afaik there isn't a specific tag, but having:
cleanup only: No functional change
in the changelog would be nice for people looking for fixes to backport.
Otherwise, I think this is a worthful cleanup.
Thomas