On Fri, 2008-08-08 at 10:07 -0400, Paul Moore wrote: > On Friday 08 August 2008 6:45:26 am Vesa-Matti J Kari wrote: > > Hello, > > > > On Thu, 7 Aug 2008, Paul Moore wrote: > > > On Wednesday 06 August 2008 8:18:20 pm Vesa-Matti Kari wrote: > > > > Replace "thing != NULL" comparisons with just "thing" to make > > > > the code look more uniform (mixed styles were used even in the > > > > same source file). > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Vesa-Matti Kari <vmkari@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > security/selinux/ss/avtab.c | 2 +- > > > > security/selinux/ss/conditional.c | 16 ++++++++-------- > > > > security/selinux/ss/ebitmap.c | 4 ++-- > > > > security/selinux/ss/hashtab.c | 6 +++--- > > > > security/selinux/ss/services.c | 8 ++++---- > > > > security/selinux/ss/sidtab.c | 12 ++++++------ > > > > > > In my opinion this suffers from the same problems as the variable > > > renaming patches. I vote "no". > > > > Hmmm. To avoid wasting my time, I asked beforehand whether such a > > trivial unifying patch was acceptable. I did this on the selinux > > mailing list and below you can see my original message followed by > > Stephen Smalley's response (it was the only reply that I got): > > I didn't respond to that other thread because I was responding to your > other thread at the same time regarding the variable renaming issue. > Perhaps I should have replied to that particular thread as well but > considering there was no code/patch attached I chose to spend my time > on other higher priority issues including your other thread. > > Yes, I can see Stephen replied to your original email and indicated he > agreed on having one style. It isn't clear to me that he necessarily > agrees with patches that do nothing more than change coding style, but > I don't want to speak for Stephen. As far as I'm concerned patches > which do nothing but change coding style or rename variables do more > harm than good and for that reason I'm NACK'ing this patch. > > The good news for you is that I'm just one person, and while ultimately > it is the maintainer's call (James or Stephen probably, I'm actually > not sure these days) the entire community can voice their opinion. Coding style cleanups are just part of life in the Linux kernel, and while they make life a bit harder for developers by conflicting with pending patches, I think they are viewed nonetheless as a win by the Linux kernel developer community in order to promote readability and long term maintainability by more than just the original developer(s). So I have no problem with these or other similar coding style cleanups to any of my code - I'm not ashamed to admit I botched the coding style in the first place ;) -- Stephen Smalley National Security Agency -- This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list. If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.
