On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 10:15:43AM +0000, Bernard Metzler wrote:
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Cheng Xu <chengyou@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Wednesday, 19 January 2022 05:19
> > To: Bernard Metzler <BMT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; jgg@xxxxxxxx;
> > dledford@xxxxxxxxxx
> > Cc: leon@xxxxxxxxxx; linux-rdma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > KaiShen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; tonylu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH rdma-next v2 09/11] RDMA/erdma: Add the
> > erdma module
> >
> >
> >
> > On 1/18/22 8:53 PM, Bernard Metzler wrote:
> >
> > <...>
> >
> > >> +static int erdma_res_cb_init(struct erdma_dev *dev)
> > >> +{
> > >> + int i;
> > >> +
> > >> + for (i = 0; i < ERDMA_RES_CNT; i++) {
> > >> + dev->res_cb[i].next_alloc_idx = 1;
> > >> + spin_lock_init(&dev->res_cb[i].lock);
> > >> + dev->res_cb[i].bitmap = kcalloc(BITS_TO_LONGS(dev-
> > >>> res_cb[i].max_cap),
> > >> + sizeof(unsigned long), GFP_KERNEL);
> > >
> > > better stay with less than 80 chars per line
> > > throughout the patch series (I count currently 287 line wraps).
> > >
> >
> > The kernel now allows 100 chars per line, and the checkpath.pl also
> > checks using the new rule now. I will try to change this to 80 chars,
> > but it actually makes some code not friendly for reading due to
> > indent.
> >
>
> Do we have a recommendation/agreement to stay with 80 chars per line
> for the RDMA subsystem? I'd like it, but I am not sure.
Yes, we continue to use old 80 chars limit.
Thanks
>
> > <...>
> >
>
> Thanks,
> Bernard.
>
