Re: [PATCH] CodingStyle: Printing numbers in parentheses is fine
From: Jean Delvare
Date: Sun Sep 30 2007 - 06:12:15 EST
On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 03:51:56 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Sep 2007 12:25:30 +0200 Jean Delvare <khali@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Remove a not particularly relevant rule from CodingStyle.
> > Sometimes, printing numbers in parentheses doesn't add value, but in
> > some (most?) cases it makes the message easier to read. As a matter of
> > fact, this practice is widely used in the kernel:
> > linux-2.6.23-rc8$ quilt grep -I '(%l*[du])' | wc -l
> > 3166
> > linux-2.6.23-rc8$
> > Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <khali@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > Documentation/CodingStyle | 2 --
> > 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
> > --- linux-2.6.23-rc8.orig/Documentation/CodingStyle 2007-07-23 16:44:32.000000000 +0200
> > +++ linux-2.6.23-rc8/Documentation/CodingStyle 2007-09-28 23:53:23.000000000 +0200
> > @@ -638,8 +638,6 @@ concise, clear, and unambiguous.
> > Kernel messages do not have to be terminated with a period.
> > -Printing numbers in parentheses (%d) adds no value and should be avoided.
> > -
> > There are a number of driver model diagnostic macros in <linux/device.h>
> > which you should use to make sure messages are matched to the right device
> > and driver, and are tagged with the right level: dev_err(), dev_warn(),
> I wonder how that got there.
> Printing something like
> bytes remaining: 0x12 (18)
> is a quite logical thing to do, although pretty darm pointless.
> otoh, looking at the various instances, we have lots of stuff like this:
> printk(KERN_ERR "seq-oss: unable to delete queue %d (%d)\n", queue, rc);
> which I would argue is wrong and is inconsistent with most other error
> reporting. It should be
> unable to delete queue %d: %d
I disagree. Reporting an error code is precisely the case where I think
(%d) is valuable. A colon suggests that an understandable explanation
follows, while an error code isn't that understandable. What I expect
as a user is:
Read failed: I/O error
Read failed (-5)
And I thought this was the usual convention, too, but you seem to
> And this:
> printk(KERN_ERR "%s: context size (%u) exceeds payload "
> doesn't need the parens
> printk("hardirqs last enabled at (%u): ", curr->hardirq_enable_event);
> printk("hardirqs last disabled at (%u): ", curr->hardirq_disable_event);
> printk("softirqs last enabled at (%u): ", curr->softirq_enable_event);
> printk("softirqs last disabled at (%u): ", curr->softirq_disable_event);
> all the parens are just illogical and should be removed.
> xlog_warn("XFS: %s: unrecognised log version (%d).",
> __FUNCTION__, INT_GET(rhead->h_version, ARCH_CONVERT));
> should use "unrecognised log version: %d"
I'm fine both ways.
> printk(KERN_ERR "udf: unknown compression code (%d) stri=%s\n",
> cmp_id, ocu_i->u_name);
> should use colon as well.
> So in fact a large number of the instances I see in there are illogical and
> basically gramatically wrong and should be converted to use a colon.
I would be fine having one or more explicit rules in CodingStyle on how
log messages should be formatted, if you think it adds value. But a
general statement "don't do foo" when it's sometimes just fine to do
foo, doesn't add any value IMHO.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/