Re: [PATCH v2 7/8] auxdisplay: Add Titanmec TM16xx 7-segment display controllers driver

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Wed, Jul 02, 2025 at 05:05:00PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 30/06/2025 16:17, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 30, 2025 at 01:39:25PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> On 30/06/2025 11:54, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Jun 30, 2025 at 11:27:21AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>>> On 30/06/2025 09:27, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >>>>> On Mon, Jun 30, 2025 at 08:12:16AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>>>>> On 29/06/2025 15:18, Jean-François Lessard wrote:

...

> >>>>>>> +	display->leds =
> >>>>>>> +		devm_kcalloc(dev, display->num_leds, sizeof(*display->leds), GFP_KERNEL);
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Wrong wrapping. Use kernel style, not clang style.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> +	if (!display->leds)
> >>>>>>> +		return -ENOMEM;
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Just wondering how .clang-format is official? Note some of the maintainers even
> >>>>
> >>>> First time I hear above clang style is preferred. Where is it expected?
> >>>
> >>> Documented here:
> >>> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/coding-style.html#you-ve-made-a-mess-of-it
> >>
> >> I mean, which maintainers prefer such style of wrapping. Above I know,
> >> but it does not solve the discussion we have here - above line wrapping
> >> preferred by clang and opposite to most of the kernel code.
> > 
> > IIRC Dan Williams (as you might have deduced already from the links).
> BTW, if that's your preference, then obviously it is perfectly fine.
> It's your subsystem.

It's not my preference for the record, but I wanted to know more about
an application of the clang-format. And perhaps some docs (besides .clang-format)
should be fixed rather sooner?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko