On Sun, May 28, 2023 at 12:31:11AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > Note this is only subjectively better. IMHO with just a single space > this is perfectly readable. Aligning the = might look nice, but it's > also annoying at times. When you add another member (e.g. > .iterate_shared) you either add a line that doesn't match all others, or > you have to touch all other lines of that struct which (objectively?) > hurts readability of that patch. Also for generated patches this kind of > alignment yields extra work. (See for example > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230525205840.734432-1-u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > which required semi-manual fixup to keep the alignment after coccinelle > generated the patch.) > Agreed, that this would create more troubles than benefits. > If you still think this is a good idea, I'd ask you to stick to one > style for the whole file. e.g. axis_fifo_driver uses inconsistent > and different indention. > > A thing that IMHO is more useful to change here, is the name fops; I'd > suggest something like axis_fifo_fops (and also use prefixes for some > other symbols like "get_dts_property"). In 6.4-rc1 my ctags file knows > about 64 different places that define something called "fops". > Agreed. Upon further walkthrough I think this driver requires a lot of cleanup so I will leave that cleanup for another dedicated patch series for now. Prathu
