Hi Sakari, On 6/9/23 11:37, Sakari Ailus wrote: > Hi Hans, > > On Wed, Jun 07, 2023 at 06:46:44PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> During all the work done on the atomisp driver I have mostly been testing >> on devices with an ov2680 sensor. As such I have also done a lot of work >> on the atomisp-ov2680.c atomisp specific sensor driver. > > Could you wrap the lines at or before 80 characters, unless there are > reason (generally other coding style rules) to keep them longer? I can certainly do that. But the kernel has stopped requiring this now and I often find that sticking within the new official limit of 100 chars leads to IMHO better readable code the needlessly breaking the lines in 2. Are there any specific reasons why you want to keep enforcing the old and obsolete 80 chars limit ? I must say that inconsistent enforcing of a 80 vs 100 chars limit across the kernel is quite confusing for contributors. E.g. I'm pretty sure that if I had stuck to 80 chars with this patch-set from the start that Andy would then have pointed out several places where I had needlessly broken a lone in 2. So having 2 different limits leads to reviewers contradicting each other which is really not helpful. SO IMHO if drivers/media is going to keep enforcing a 80 chars limit then this needs to be clearly documented (with rationale) somewhere. Or did I miss this already being documented somewhere ? Regards, Hans
