[e16e8f2] | 1 | Syslinux uses Linux kernel coding style, except that we are "heretic" |
---|
| 2 | in the sense of using 4 spaces instead of 8 for indentation. |
---|
| 3 | |
---|
| 4 | This coding style will be applied after the 3.81 release. |
---|
| 5 | |
---|
| 6 | |
---|
| 7 | ------------------------------------------------- |
---|
| 8 | |
---|
| 9 | Linux kernel coding style |
---|
| 10 | |
---|
| 11 | This is a short document describing the preferred coding style for the |
---|
| 12 | linux kernel. Coding style is very personal, and I won't _force_ my |
---|
| 13 | views on anybody, but this is what goes for anything that I have to be |
---|
| 14 | able to maintain, and I'd prefer it for most other things too. Please |
---|
| 15 | at least consider the points made here. |
---|
| 16 | |
---|
| 17 | First off, I'd suggest printing out a copy of the GNU coding standards, |
---|
| 18 | and NOT read it. Burn them, it's a great symbolic gesture. |
---|
| 19 | |
---|
| 20 | Anyway, here goes: |
---|
| 21 | |
---|
| 22 | |
---|
| 23 | Chapter 1: Indentation |
---|
| 24 | |
---|
| 25 | Tabs are 8 characters, and thus indentations are also 8 characters. |
---|
| 26 | There are heretic movements that try to make indentations 4 (or even 2!) |
---|
| 27 | characters deep, and that is akin to trying to define the value of PI to |
---|
| 28 | be 3. |
---|
| 29 | |
---|
| 30 | Rationale: The whole idea behind indentation is to clearly define where |
---|
| 31 | a block of control starts and ends. Especially when you've been looking |
---|
| 32 | at your screen for 20 straight hours, you'll find it a lot easier to see |
---|
| 33 | how the indentation works if you have large indentations. |
---|
| 34 | |
---|
| 35 | Now, some people will claim that having 8-character indentations makes |
---|
| 36 | the code move too far to the right, and makes it hard to read on a |
---|
| 37 | 80-character terminal screen. The answer to that is that if you need |
---|
| 38 | more than 3 levels of indentation, you're screwed anyway, and should fix |
---|
| 39 | your program. |
---|
| 40 | |
---|
| 41 | In short, 8-char indents make things easier to read, and have the added |
---|
| 42 | benefit of warning you when you're nesting your functions too deep. |
---|
| 43 | Heed that warning. |
---|
| 44 | |
---|
| 45 | The preferred way to ease multiple indentation levels in a switch statement is |
---|
| 46 | to align the "switch" and its subordinate "case" labels in the same column |
---|
| 47 | instead of "double-indenting" the "case" labels. E.g.: |
---|
| 48 | |
---|
| 49 | switch (suffix) { |
---|
| 50 | case 'G': |
---|
| 51 | case 'g': |
---|
| 52 | mem <<= 30; |
---|
| 53 | break; |
---|
| 54 | case 'M': |
---|
| 55 | case 'm': |
---|
| 56 | mem <<= 20; |
---|
| 57 | break; |
---|
| 58 | case 'K': |
---|
| 59 | case 'k': |
---|
| 60 | mem <<= 10; |
---|
| 61 | /* fall through */ |
---|
| 62 | default: |
---|
| 63 | break; |
---|
| 64 | } |
---|
| 65 | |
---|
| 66 | |
---|
| 67 | Don't put multiple statements on a single line unless you have |
---|
| 68 | something to hide: |
---|
| 69 | |
---|
| 70 | if (condition) do_this; |
---|
| 71 | do_something_everytime; |
---|
| 72 | |
---|
| 73 | Don't put multiple assignments on a single line either. Kernel coding style |
---|
| 74 | is super simple. Avoid tricky expressions. |
---|
| 75 | |
---|
| 76 | Outside of comments, documentation and except in Kconfig, spaces are never |
---|
| 77 | used for indentation, and the above example is deliberately broken. |
---|
| 78 | |
---|
| 79 | Get a decent editor and don't leave whitespace at the end of lines. |
---|
| 80 | |
---|
| 81 | |
---|
| 82 | Chapter 2: Breaking long lines and strings |
---|
| 83 | |
---|
| 84 | Coding style is all about readability and maintainability using commonly |
---|
| 85 | available tools. |
---|
| 86 | |
---|
| 87 | The limit on the length of lines is 80 columns and this is a strongly |
---|
| 88 | preferred limit. |
---|
| 89 | |
---|
| 90 | Statements longer than 80 columns will be broken into sensible chunks. |
---|
| 91 | Descendants are always substantially shorter than the parent and are placed |
---|
| 92 | substantially to the right. The same applies to function headers with a long |
---|
| 93 | argument list. Long strings are as well broken into shorter strings. The |
---|
| 94 | only exception to this is where exceeding 80 columns significantly increases |
---|
| 95 | readability and does not hide information. |
---|
| 96 | |
---|
| 97 | void fun(int a, int b, int c) |
---|
| 98 | { |
---|
| 99 | if (condition) |
---|
| 100 | printk(KERN_WARNING "Warning this is a long printk with " |
---|
| 101 | "3 parameters a: %u b: %u " |
---|
| 102 | "c: %u \n", a, b, c); |
---|
| 103 | else |
---|
| 104 | next_statement; |
---|
| 105 | } |
---|
| 106 | |
---|
| 107 | Chapter 3: Placing Braces and Spaces |
---|
| 108 | |
---|
| 109 | The other issue that always comes up in C styling is the placement of |
---|
| 110 | braces. Unlike the indent size, there are few technical reasons to |
---|
| 111 | choose one placement strategy over the other, but the preferred way, as |
---|
| 112 | shown to us by the prophets Kernighan and Ritchie, is to put the opening |
---|
| 113 | brace last on the line, and put the closing brace first, thusly: |
---|
| 114 | |
---|
| 115 | if (x is true) { |
---|
| 116 | we do y |
---|
| 117 | } |
---|
| 118 | |
---|
| 119 | This applies to all non-function statement blocks (if, switch, for, |
---|
| 120 | while, do). E.g.: |
---|
| 121 | |
---|
| 122 | switch (action) { |
---|
| 123 | case KOBJ_ADD: |
---|
| 124 | return "add"; |
---|
| 125 | case KOBJ_REMOVE: |
---|
| 126 | return "remove"; |
---|
| 127 | case KOBJ_CHANGE: |
---|
| 128 | return "change"; |
---|
| 129 | default: |
---|
| 130 | return NULL; |
---|
| 131 | } |
---|
| 132 | |
---|
| 133 | However, there is one special case, namely functions: they have the |
---|
| 134 | opening brace at the beginning of the next line, thus: |
---|
| 135 | |
---|
| 136 | int function(int x) |
---|
| 137 | { |
---|
| 138 | body of function |
---|
| 139 | } |
---|
| 140 | |
---|
| 141 | Heretic people all over the world have claimed that this inconsistency |
---|
| 142 | is ... well ... inconsistent, but all right-thinking people know that |
---|
| 143 | (a) K&R are _right_ and (b) K&R are right. Besides, functions are |
---|
| 144 | special anyway (you can't nest them in C). |
---|
| 145 | |
---|
| 146 | Note that the closing brace is empty on a line of its own, _except_ in |
---|
| 147 | the cases where it is followed by a continuation of the same statement, |
---|
| 148 | ie a "while" in a do-statement or an "else" in an if-statement, like |
---|
| 149 | this: |
---|
| 150 | |
---|
| 151 | do { |
---|
| 152 | body of do-loop |
---|
| 153 | } while (condition); |
---|
| 154 | |
---|
| 155 | and |
---|
| 156 | |
---|
| 157 | if (x == y) { |
---|
| 158 | .. |
---|
| 159 | } else if (x > y) { |
---|
| 160 | ... |
---|
| 161 | } else { |
---|
| 162 | .... |
---|
| 163 | } |
---|
| 164 | |
---|
| 165 | Rationale: K&R. |
---|
| 166 | |
---|
| 167 | Also, note that this brace-placement also minimizes the number of empty |
---|
| 168 | (or almost empty) lines, without any loss of readability. Thus, as the |
---|
| 169 | supply of new-lines on your screen is not a renewable resource (think |
---|
| 170 | 25-line terminal screens here), you have more empty lines to put |
---|
| 171 | comments on. |
---|
| 172 | |
---|
| 173 | Do not unnecessarily use braces where a single statement will do. |
---|
| 174 | |
---|
| 175 | if (condition) |
---|
| 176 | action(); |
---|
| 177 | |
---|
| 178 | This does not apply if one branch of a conditional statement is a single |
---|
| 179 | statement. Use braces in both branches. |
---|
| 180 | |
---|
| 181 | if (condition) { |
---|
| 182 | do_this(); |
---|
| 183 | do_that(); |
---|
| 184 | } else { |
---|
| 185 | otherwise(); |
---|
| 186 | } |
---|
| 187 | |
---|
| 188 | 3.1: Spaces |
---|
| 189 | |
---|
| 190 | Linux kernel style for use of spaces depends (mostly) on |
---|
| 191 | function-versus-keyword usage. Use a space after (most) keywords. The |
---|
| 192 | notable exceptions are sizeof, typeof, alignof, and __attribute__, which look |
---|
| 193 | somewhat like functions (and are usually used with parentheses in Linux, |
---|
| 194 | although they are not required in the language, as in: "sizeof info" after |
---|
| 195 | "struct fileinfo info;" is declared). |
---|
| 196 | |
---|
| 197 | So use a space after these keywords: |
---|
| 198 | if, switch, case, for, do, while |
---|
| 199 | but not with sizeof, typeof, alignof, or __attribute__. E.g., |
---|
| 200 | s = sizeof(struct file); |
---|
| 201 | |
---|
| 202 | Do not add spaces around (inside) parenthesized expressions. This example is |
---|
| 203 | *bad*: |
---|
| 204 | |
---|
| 205 | s = sizeof( struct file ); |
---|
| 206 | |
---|
| 207 | When declaring pointer data or a function that returns a pointer type, the |
---|
| 208 | preferred use of '*' is adjacent to the data name or function name and not |
---|
| 209 | adjacent to the type name. Examples: |
---|
| 210 | |
---|
| 211 | char *linux_banner; |
---|
| 212 | unsigned long long memparse(char *ptr, char **retptr); |
---|
| 213 | char *match_strdup(substring_t *s); |
---|
| 214 | |
---|
| 215 | Use one space around (on each side of) most binary and ternary operators, |
---|
| 216 | such as any of these: |
---|
| 217 | |
---|
| 218 | = + - < > * / % | & ^ <= >= == != ? : |
---|
| 219 | |
---|
| 220 | but no space after unary operators: |
---|
| 221 | & * + - ~ ! sizeof typeof alignof __attribute__ defined |
---|
| 222 | |
---|
| 223 | no space before the postfix increment & decrement unary operators: |
---|
| 224 | ++ -- |
---|
| 225 | |
---|
| 226 | no space after the prefix increment & decrement unary operators: |
---|
| 227 | ++ -- |
---|
| 228 | |
---|
| 229 | and no space around the '.' and "->" structure member operators. |
---|
| 230 | |
---|
| 231 | Do not leave trailing whitespace at the ends of lines. Some editors with |
---|
| 232 | "smart" indentation will insert whitespace at the beginning of new lines as |
---|
| 233 | appropriate, so you can start typing the next line of code right away. |
---|
| 234 | However, some such editors do not remove the whitespace if you end up not |
---|
| 235 | putting a line of code there, such as if you leave a blank line. As a result, |
---|
| 236 | you end up with lines containing trailing whitespace. |
---|
| 237 | |
---|
| 238 | Git will warn you about patches that introduce trailing whitespace, and can |
---|
| 239 | optionally strip the trailing whitespace for you; however, if applying a series |
---|
| 240 | of patches, this may make later patches in the series fail by changing their |
---|
| 241 | context lines. |
---|
| 242 | |
---|
| 243 | |
---|
| 244 | Chapter 4: Naming |
---|
| 245 | |
---|
| 246 | C is a Spartan language, and so should your naming be. Unlike Modula-2 |
---|
| 247 | and Pascal programmers, C programmers do not use cute names like |
---|
| 248 | ThisVariableIsATemporaryCounter. A C programmer would call that |
---|
| 249 | variable "tmp", which is much easier to write, and not the least more |
---|
| 250 | difficult to understand. |
---|
| 251 | |
---|
| 252 | HOWEVER, while mixed-case names are frowned upon, descriptive names for |
---|
| 253 | global variables are a must. To call a global function "foo" is a |
---|
| 254 | shooting offense. |
---|
| 255 | |
---|
| 256 | GLOBAL variables (to be used only if you _really_ need them) need to |
---|
| 257 | have descriptive names, as do global functions. If you have a function |
---|
| 258 | that counts the number of active users, you should call that |
---|
| 259 | "count_active_users()" or similar, you should _not_ call it "cntusr()". |
---|
| 260 | |
---|
| 261 | Encoding the type of a function into the name (so-called Hungarian |
---|
| 262 | notation) is brain damaged - the compiler knows the types anyway and can |
---|
| 263 | check those, and it only confuses the programmer. No wonder MicroSoft |
---|
| 264 | makes buggy programs. |
---|
| 265 | |
---|
| 266 | LOCAL variable names should be short, and to the point. If you have |
---|
| 267 | some random integer loop counter, it should probably be called "i". |
---|
| 268 | Calling it "loop_counter" is non-productive, if there is no chance of it |
---|
| 269 | being mis-understood. Similarly, "tmp" can be just about any type of |
---|
| 270 | variable that is used to hold a temporary value. |
---|
| 271 | |
---|
| 272 | If you are afraid to mix up your local variable names, you have another |
---|
| 273 | problem, which is called the function-growth-hormone-imbalance syndrome. |
---|
| 274 | See chapter 6 (Functions). |
---|
| 275 | |
---|
| 276 | |
---|
| 277 | Chapter 5: Typedefs |
---|
| 278 | |
---|
| 279 | Please don't use things like "vps_t". |
---|
| 280 | |
---|
| 281 | It's a _mistake_ to use typedef for structures and pointers. When you see a |
---|
| 282 | |
---|
| 283 | vps_t a; |
---|
| 284 | |
---|
| 285 | in the source, what does it mean? |
---|
| 286 | |
---|
| 287 | In contrast, if it says |
---|
| 288 | |
---|
| 289 | struct virtual_container *a; |
---|
| 290 | |
---|
| 291 | you can actually tell what "a" is. |
---|
| 292 | |
---|
| 293 | Lots of people think that typedefs "help readability". Not so. They are |
---|
| 294 | useful only for: |
---|
| 295 | |
---|
| 296 | (a) totally opaque objects (where the typedef is actively used to _hide_ |
---|
| 297 | what the object is). |
---|
| 298 | |
---|
| 299 | Example: "pte_t" etc. opaque objects that you can only access using |
---|
| 300 | the proper accessor functions. |
---|
| 301 | |
---|
| 302 | NOTE! Opaqueness and "accessor functions" are not good in themselves. |
---|
| 303 | The reason we have them for things like pte_t etc. is that there |
---|
| 304 | really is absolutely _zero_ portably accessible information there. |
---|
| 305 | |
---|
| 306 | (b) Clear integer types, where the abstraction _helps_ avoid confusion |
---|
| 307 | whether it is "int" or "long". |
---|
| 308 | |
---|
| 309 | u8/u16/u32 are perfectly fine typedefs, although they fit into |
---|
| 310 | category (d) better than here. |
---|
| 311 | |
---|
| 312 | NOTE! Again - there needs to be a _reason_ for this. If something is |
---|
| 313 | "unsigned long", then there's no reason to do |
---|
| 314 | |
---|
| 315 | typedef unsigned long myflags_t; |
---|
| 316 | |
---|
| 317 | but if there is a clear reason for why it under certain circumstances |
---|
| 318 | might be an "unsigned int" and under other configurations might be |
---|
| 319 | "unsigned long", then by all means go ahead and use a typedef. |
---|
| 320 | |
---|
| 321 | (c) when you use sparse to literally create a _new_ type for |
---|
| 322 | type-checking. |
---|
| 323 | |
---|
| 324 | (d) New types which are identical to standard C99 types, in certain |
---|
| 325 | exceptional circumstances. |
---|
| 326 | |
---|
| 327 | Although it would only take a short amount of time for the eyes and |
---|
| 328 | brain to become accustomed to the standard types like 'uint32_t', |
---|
| 329 | some people object to their use anyway. |
---|
| 330 | |
---|
| 331 | Therefore, the Linux-specific 'u8/u16/u32/u64' types and their |
---|
| 332 | signed equivalents which are identical to standard types are |
---|
| 333 | permitted -- although they are not mandatory in new code of your |
---|
| 334 | own. |
---|
| 335 | |
---|
| 336 | When editing existing code which already uses one or the other set |
---|
| 337 | of types, you should conform to the existing choices in that code. |
---|
| 338 | |
---|
| 339 | (e) Types safe for use in userspace. |
---|
| 340 | |
---|
| 341 | In certain structures which are visible to userspace, we cannot |
---|
| 342 | require C99 types and cannot use the 'u32' form above. Thus, we |
---|
| 343 | use __u32 and similar types in all structures which are shared |
---|
| 344 | with userspace. |
---|
| 345 | |
---|
| 346 | Maybe there are other cases too, but the rule should basically be to NEVER |
---|
| 347 | EVER use a typedef unless you can clearly match one of those rules. |
---|
| 348 | |
---|
| 349 | In general, a pointer, or a struct that has elements that can reasonably |
---|
| 350 | be directly accessed should _never_ be a typedef. |
---|
| 351 | |
---|
| 352 | |
---|
| 353 | Chapter 6: Functions |
---|
| 354 | |
---|
| 355 | Functions should be short and sweet, and do just one thing. They should |
---|
| 356 | fit on one or two screenfuls of text (the ISO/ANSI screen size is 80x24, |
---|
| 357 | as we all know), and do one thing and do that well. |
---|
| 358 | |
---|
| 359 | The maximum length of a function is inversely proportional to the |
---|
| 360 | complexity and indentation level of that function. So, if you have a |
---|
| 361 | conceptually simple function that is just one long (but simple) |
---|
| 362 | case-statement, where you have to do lots of small things for a lot of |
---|
| 363 | different cases, it's OK to have a longer function. |
---|
| 364 | |
---|
| 365 | However, if you have a complex function, and you suspect that a |
---|
| 366 | less-than-gifted first-year high-school student might not even |
---|
| 367 | understand what the function is all about, you should adhere to the |
---|
| 368 | maximum limits all the more closely. Use helper functions with |
---|
| 369 | descriptive names (you can ask the compiler to in-line them if you think |
---|
| 370 | it's performance-critical, and it will probably do a better job of it |
---|
| 371 | than you would have done). |
---|
| 372 | |
---|
| 373 | Another measure of the function is the number of local variables. They |
---|
| 374 | shouldn't exceed 5-10, or you're doing something wrong. Re-think the |
---|
| 375 | function, and split it into smaller pieces. A human brain can |
---|
| 376 | generally easily keep track of about 7 different things, anything more |
---|
| 377 | and it gets confused. You know you're brilliant, but maybe you'd like |
---|
| 378 | to understand what you did 2 weeks from now. |
---|
| 379 | |
---|
| 380 | In source files, separate functions with one blank line. If the function is |
---|
| 381 | exported, the EXPORT* macro for it should follow immediately after the closing |
---|
| 382 | function brace line. E.g.: |
---|
| 383 | |
---|
| 384 | int system_is_up(void) |
---|
| 385 | { |
---|
| 386 | return system_state == SYSTEM_RUNNING; |
---|
| 387 | } |
---|
| 388 | EXPORT_SYMBOL(system_is_up); |
---|
| 389 | |
---|
| 390 | In function prototypes, include parameter names with their data types. |
---|
| 391 | Although this is not required by the C language, it is preferred in Linux |
---|
| 392 | because it is a simple way to add valuable information for the reader. |
---|
| 393 | |
---|
| 394 | |
---|
| 395 | Chapter 7: Centralized exiting of functions |
---|
| 396 | |
---|
| 397 | Albeit deprecated by some people, the equivalent of the goto statement is |
---|
| 398 | used frequently by compilers in form of the unconditional jump instruction. |
---|
| 399 | |
---|
| 400 | The goto statement comes in handy when a function exits from multiple |
---|
| 401 | locations and some common work such as cleanup has to be done. |
---|
| 402 | |
---|
| 403 | The rationale is: |
---|
| 404 | |
---|
| 405 | - unconditional statements are easier to understand and follow |
---|
| 406 | - nesting is reduced |
---|
| 407 | - errors by not updating individual exit points when making |
---|
| 408 | modifications are prevented |
---|
| 409 | - saves the compiler work to optimize redundant code away ;) |
---|
| 410 | |
---|
| 411 | int fun(int a) |
---|
| 412 | { |
---|
| 413 | int result = 0; |
---|
| 414 | char *buffer = kmalloc(SIZE); |
---|
| 415 | |
---|
| 416 | if (buffer == NULL) |
---|
| 417 | return -ENOMEM; |
---|
| 418 | |
---|
| 419 | if (condition1) { |
---|
| 420 | while (loop1) { |
---|
| 421 | ... |
---|
| 422 | } |
---|
| 423 | result = 1; |
---|
| 424 | goto out; |
---|
| 425 | } |
---|
| 426 | ... |
---|
| 427 | out: |
---|
| 428 | kfree(buffer); |
---|
| 429 | return result; |
---|
| 430 | } |
---|
| 431 | |
---|
| 432 | Chapter 8: Commenting |
---|
| 433 | |
---|
| 434 | Comments are good, but there is also a danger of over-commenting. NEVER |
---|
| 435 | try to explain HOW your code works in a comment: it's much better to |
---|
| 436 | write the code so that the _working_ is obvious, and it's a waste of |
---|
| 437 | time to explain badly written code. |
---|
| 438 | |
---|
| 439 | Generally, you want your comments to tell WHAT your code does, not HOW. |
---|
| 440 | Also, try to avoid putting comments inside a function body: if the |
---|
| 441 | function is so complex that you need to separately comment parts of it, |
---|
| 442 | you should probably go back to chapter 6 for a while. You can make |
---|
| 443 | small comments to note or warn about something particularly clever (or |
---|
| 444 | ugly), but try to avoid excess. Instead, put the comments at the head |
---|
| 445 | of the function, telling people what it does, and possibly WHY it does |
---|
| 446 | it. |
---|
| 447 | |
---|
| 448 | When commenting the kernel API functions, please use the kernel-doc format. |
---|
| 449 | See the files Documentation/kernel-doc-nano-HOWTO.txt and scripts/kernel-doc |
---|
| 450 | for details. |
---|
| 451 | |
---|
| 452 | Linux style for comments is the C89 "/* ... */" style. |
---|
| 453 | Don't use C99-style "// ..." comments. |
---|
| 454 | |
---|
| 455 | The preferred style for long (multi-line) comments is: |
---|
| 456 | |
---|
| 457 | /* |
---|
| 458 | * This is the preferred style for multi-line |
---|
| 459 | * comments in the Linux kernel source code. |
---|
| 460 | * Please use it consistently. |
---|
| 461 | * |
---|
| 462 | * Description: A column of asterisks on the left side, |
---|
| 463 | * with beginning and ending almost-blank lines. |
---|
| 464 | */ |
---|
| 465 | |
---|
| 466 | It's also important to comment data, whether they are basic types or derived |
---|
| 467 | types. To this end, use just one data declaration per line (no commas for |
---|
| 468 | multiple data declarations). This leaves you room for a small comment on each |
---|
| 469 | item, explaining its use. |
---|
| 470 | |
---|
| 471 | |
---|
| 472 | Chapter 9: You've made a mess of it |
---|
| 473 | |
---|
| 474 | That's OK, we all do. You've probably been told by your long-time Unix |
---|
| 475 | user helper that "GNU emacs" automatically formats the C sources for |
---|
| 476 | you, and you've noticed that yes, it does do that, but the defaults it |
---|
| 477 | uses are less than desirable (in fact, they are worse than random |
---|
| 478 | typing - an infinite number of monkeys typing into GNU emacs would never |
---|
| 479 | make a good program). |
---|
| 480 | |
---|
| 481 | So, you can either get rid of GNU emacs, or change it to use saner |
---|
| 482 | values. To do the latter, you can stick the following in your .emacs file: |
---|
| 483 | |
---|
| 484 | (defun c-lineup-arglist-tabs-only (ignored) |
---|
| 485 | "Line up argument lists by tabs, not spaces" |
---|
| 486 | (let* ((anchor (c-langelem-pos c-syntactic-element)) |
---|
| 487 | (column (c-langelem-2nd-pos c-syntactic-element)) |
---|
| 488 | (offset (- (1+ column) anchor)) |
---|
| 489 | (steps (floor offset c-basic-offset))) |
---|
| 490 | (* (max steps 1) |
---|
| 491 | c-basic-offset))) |
---|
| 492 | |
---|
| 493 | (add-hook 'c-mode-common-hook |
---|
| 494 | (lambda () |
---|
| 495 | ;; Add kernel style |
---|
| 496 | (c-add-style |
---|
| 497 | "linux-tabs-only" |
---|
| 498 | '("linux" (c-offsets-alist |
---|
| 499 | (arglist-cont-nonempty |
---|
| 500 | c-lineup-gcc-asm-reg |
---|
| 501 | c-lineup-arglist-tabs-only)))))) |
---|
| 502 | |
---|
| 503 | (add-hook 'c-mode-hook |
---|
| 504 | (lambda () |
---|
| 505 | (let ((filename (buffer-file-name))) |
---|
| 506 | ;; Enable kernel mode for the appropriate files |
---|
| 507 | (when (and filename |
---|
| 508 | (string-match (expand-file-name "~/src/linux-trees") |
---|
| 509 | filename)) |
---|
| 510 | (setq indent-tabs-mode t) |
---|
| 511 | (c-set-style "linux-tabs-only"))))) |
---|
| 512 | |
---|
| 513 | This will make emacs go better with the kernel coding style for C |
---|
| 514 | files below ~/src/linux-trees. |
---|
| 515 | |
---|
| 516 | But even if you fail in getting emacs to do sane formatting, not |
---|
| 517 | everything is lost: use "indent". |
---|
| 518 | |
---|
| 519 | Now, again, GNU indent has the same brain-dead settings that GNU emacs |
---|
| 520 | has, which is why you need to give it a few command line options. |
---|
| 521 | However, that's not too bad, because even the makers of GNU indent |
---|
| 522 | recognize the authority of K&R (the GNU people aren't evil, they are |
---|
| 523 | just severely misguided in this matter), so you just give indent the |
---|
| 524 | options "-kr -i8" (stands for "K&R, 8 character indents"), or use |
---|
| 525 | "scripts/Lindent", which indents in the latest style. |
---|
| 526 | |
---|
| 527 | "indent" has a lot of options, and especially when it comes to comment |
---|
| 528 | re-formatting you may want to take a look at the man page. But |
---|
| 529 | remember: "indent" is not a fix for bad programming. |
---|
| 530 | |
---|
| 531 | |
---|
| 532 | Chapter 10: Kconfig configuration files |
---|
| 533 | |
---|
| 534 | For all of the Kconfig* configuration files throughout the source tree, |
---|
| 535 | the indentation is somewhat different. Lines under a "config" definition |
---|
| 536 | are indented with one tab, while help text is indented an additional two |
---|
| 537 | spaces. Example: |
---|
| 538 | |
---|
| 539 | config AUDIT |
---|
| 540 | bool "Auditing support" |
---|
| 541 | depends on NET |
---|
| 542 | help |
---|
| 543 | Enable auditing infrastructure that can be used with another |
---|
| 544 | kernel subsystem, such as SELinux (which requires this for |
---|
| 545 | logging of avc messages output). Does not do system-call |
---|
| 546 | auditing without CONFIG_AUDITSYSCALL. |
---|
| 547 | |
---|
| 548 | Features that might still be considered unstable should be defined as |
---|
| 549 | dependent on "EXPERIMENTAL": |
---|
| 550 | |
---|
| 551 | config SLUB |
---|
| 552 | depends on EXPERIMENTAL && !ARCH_USES_SLAB_PAGE_STRUCT |
---|
| 553 | bool "SLUB (Unqueued Allocator)" |
---|
| 554 | ... |
---|
| 555 | |
---|
| 556 | while seriously dangerous features (such as write support for certain |
---|
| 557 | filesystems) should advertise this prominently in their prompt string: |
---|
| 558 | |
---|
| 559 | config ADFS_FS_RW |
---|
| 560 | bool "ADFS write support (DANGEROUS)" |
---|
| 561 | depends on ADFS_FS |
---|
| 562 | ... |
---|
| 563 | |
---|
| 564 | For full documentation on the configuration files, see the file |
---|
| 565 | Documentation/kbuild/kconfig-language.txt. |
---|
| 566 | |
---|
| 567 | |
---|
| 568 | Chapter 11: Data structures |
---|
| 569 | |
---|
| 570 | Data structures that have visibility outside the single-threaded |
---|
| 571 | environment they are created and destroyed in should always have |
---|
| 572 | reference counts. In the kernel, garbage collection doesn't exist (and |
---|
| 573 | outside the kernel garbage collection is slow and inefficient), which |
---|
| 574 | means that you absolutely _have_ to reference count all your uses. |
---|
| 575 | |
---|
| 576 | Reference counting means that you can avoid locking, and allows multiple |
---|
| 577 | users to have access to the data structure in parallel - and not having |
---|
| 578 | to worry about the structure suddenly going away from under them just |
---|
| 579 | because they slept or did something else for a while. |
---|
| 580 | |
---|
| 581 | Note that locking is _not_ a replacement for reference counting. |
---|
| 582 | Locking is used to keep data structures coherent, while reference |
---|
| 583 | counting is a memory management technique. Usually both are needed, and |
---|
| 584 | they are not to be confused with each other. |
---|
| 585 | |
---|
| 586 | Many data structures can indeed have two levels of reference counting, |
---|
| 587 | when there are users of different "classes". The subclass count counts |
---|
| 588 | the number of subclass users, and decrements the global count just once |
---|
| 589 | when the subclass count goes to zero. |
---|
| 590 | |
---|
| 591 | Examples of this kind of "multi-level-reference-counting" can be found in |
---|
| 592 | memory management ("struct mm_struct": mm_users and mm_count), and in |
---|
| 593 | filesystem code ("struct super_block": s_count and s_active). |
---|
| 594 | |
---|
| 595 | Remember: if another thread can find your data structure, and you don't |
---|
| 596 | have a reference count on it, you almost certainly have a bug. |
---|
| 597 | |
---|
| 598 | |
---|
| 599 | Chapter 12: Macros, Enums and RTL |
---|
| 600 | |
---|
| 601 | Names of macros defining constants and labels in enums are capitalized. |
---|
| 602 | |
---|
| 603 | #define CONSTANT 0x12345 |
---|
| 604 | |
---|
| 605 | Enums are preferred when defining several related constants. |
---|
| 606 | |
---|
| 607 | CAPITALIZED macro names are appreciated but macros resembling functions |
---|
| 608 | may be named in lower case. |
---|
| 609 | |
---|
| 610 | Generally, inline functions are preferable to macros resembling functions. |
---|
| 611 | |
---|
| 612 | Macros with multiple statements should be enclosed in a do - while block: |
---|
| 613 | |
---|
| 614 | #define macrofun(a, b, c) \ |
---|
| 615 | do { \ |
---|
| 616 | if (a == 5) \ |
---|
| 617 | do_this(b, c); \ |
---|
| 618 | } while (0) |
---|
| 619 | |
---|
| 620 | Things to avoid when using macros: |
---|
| 621 | |
---|
| 622 | 1) macros that affect control flow: |
---|
| 623 | |
---|
| 624 | #define FOO(x) \ |
---|
| 625 | do { \ |
---|
| 626 | if (blah(x) < 0) \ |
---|
| 627 | return -EBUGGERED; \ |
---|
| 628 | } while(0) |
---|
| 629 | |
---|
| 630 | is a _very_ bad idea. It looks like a function call but exits the "calling" |
---|
| 631 | function; don't break the internal parsers of those who will read the code. |
---|
| 632 | |
---|
| 633 | 2) macros that depend on having a local variable with a magic name: |
---|
| 634 | |
---|
| 635 | #define FOO(val) bar(index, val) |
---|
| 636 | |
---|
| 637 | might look like a good thing, but it's confusing as hell when one reads the |
---|
| 638 | code and it's prone to breakage from seemingly innocent changes. |
---|
| 639 | |
---|
| 640 | 3) macros with arguments that are used as l-values: FOO(x) = y; will |
---|
| 641 | bite you if somebody e.g. turns FOO into an inline function. |
---|
| 642 | |
---|
| 643 | 4) forgetting about precedence: macros defining constants using expressions |
---|
| 644 | must enclose the expression in parentheses. Beware of similar issues with |
---|
| 645 | macros using parameters. |
---|
| 646 | |
---|
| 647 | #define CONSTANT 0x4000 |
---|
| 648 | #define CONSTEXP (CONSTANT | 3) |
---|
| 649 | |
---|
| 650 | The cpp manual deals with macros exhaustively. The gcc internals manual also |
---|
| 651 | covers RTL which is used frequently with assembly language in the kernel. |
---|
| 652 | |
---|
| 653 | |
---|
| 654 | Chapter 13: Printing kernel messages |
---|
| 655 | |
---|
| 656 | Kernel developers like to be seen as literate. Do mind the spelling |
---|
| 657 | of kernel messages to make a good impression. Do not use crippled |
---|
| 658 | words like "dont"; use "do not" or "don't" instead. Make the messages |
---|
| 659 | concise, clear, and unambiguous. |
---|
| 660 | |
---|
| 661 | Kernel messages do not have to be terminated with a period. |
---|
| 662 | |
---|
| 663 | Printing numbers in parentheses (%d) adds no value and should be avoided. |
---|
| 664 | |
---|
| 665 | There are a number of driver model diagnostic macros in <linux/device.h> |
---|
| 666 | which you should use to make sure messages are matched to the right device |
---|
| 667 | and driver, and are tagged with the right level: dev_err(), dev_warn(), |
---|
| 668 | dev_info(), and so forth. For messages that aren't associated with a |
---|
| 669 | particular device, <linux/kernel.h> defines pr_debug() and pr_info(). |
---|
| 670 | |
---|
| 671 | Coming up with good debugging messages can be quite a challenge; and once |
---|
| 672 | you have them, they can be a huge help for remote troubleshooting. Such |
---|
| 673 | messages should be compiled out when the DEBUG symbol is not defined (that |
---|
| 674 | is, by default they are not included). When you use dev_dbg() or pr_debug(), |
---|
| 675 | that's automatic. Many subsystems have Kconfig options to turn on -DDEBUG. |
---|
| 676 | A related convention uses VERBOSE_DEBUG to add dev_vdbg() messages to the |
---|
| 677 | ones already enabled by DEBUG. |
---|
| 678 | |
---|
| 679 | |
---|
| 680 | Chapter 14: Allocating memory |
---|
| 681 | |
---|
| 682 | The kernel provides the following general purpose memory allocators: |
---|
| 683 | kmalloc(), kzalloc(), kcalloc(), and vmalloc(). Please refer to the API |
---|
| 684 | documentation for further information about them. |
---|
| 685 | |
---|
| 686 | The preferred form for passing a size of a struct is the following: |
---|
| 687 | |
---|
| 688 | p = kmalloc(sizeof(*p), ...); |
---|
| 689 | |
---|
| 690 | The alternative form where struct name is spelled out hurts readability and |
---|
| 691 | introduces an opportunity for a bug when the pointer variable type is changed |
---|
| 692 | but the corresponding sizeof that is passed to a memory allocator is not. |
---|
| 693 | |
---|
| 694 | Casting the return value which is a void pointer is redundant. The conversion |
---|
| 695 | from void pointer to any other pointer type is guaranteed by the C programming |
---|
| 696 | language. |
---|
| 697 | |
---|
| 698 | |
---|
| 699 | Chapter 15: The inline disease |
---|
| 700 | |
---|
| 701 | There appears to be a common misperception that gcc has a magic "make me |
---|
| 702 | faster" speedup option called "inline". While the use of inlines can be |
---|
| 703 | appropriate (for example as a means of replacing macros, see Chapter 12), it |
---|
| 704 | very often is not. Abundant use of the inline keyword leads to a much bigger |
---|
| 705 | kernel, which in turn slows the system as a whole down, due to a bigger |
---|
| 706 | icache footprint for the CPU and simply because there is less memory |
---|
| 707 | available for the pagecache. Just think about it; a pagecache miss causes a |
---|
| 708 | disk seek, which easily takes 5 miliseconds. There are a LOT of cpu cycles |
---|
| 709 | that can go into these 5 miliseconds. |
---|
| 710 | |
---|
| 711 | A reasonable rule of thumb is to not put inline at functions that have more |
---|
| 712 | than 3 lines of code in them. An exception to this rule are the cases where |
---|
| 713 | a parameter is known to be a compiletime constant, and as a result of this |
---|
| 714 | constantness you *know* the compiler will be able to optimize most of your |
---|
| 715 | function away at compile time. For a good example of this later case, see |
---|
| 716 | the kmalloc() inline function. |
---|
| 717 | |
---|
| 718 | Often people argue that adding inline to functions that are static and used |
---|
| 719 | only once is always a win since there is no space tradeoff. While this is |
---|
| 720 | technically correct, gcc is capable of inlining these automatically without |
---|
| 721 | help, and the maintenance issue of removing the inline when a second user |
---|
| 722 | appears outweighs the potential value of the hint that tells gcc to do |
---|
| 723 | something it would have done anyway. |
---|
| 724 | |
---|
| 725 | |
---|
| 726 | Chapter 16: Function return values and names |
---|
| 727 | |
---|
| 728 | Functions can return values of many different kinds, and one of the |
---|
| 729 | most common is a value indicating whether the function succeeded or |
---|
| 730 | failed. Such a value can be represented as an error-code integer |
---|
| 731 | (-Exxx = failure, 0 = success) or a "succeeded" boolean (0 = failure, |
---|
| 732 | non-zero = success). |
---|
| 733 | |
---|
| 734 | Mixing up these two sorts of representations is a fertile source of |
---|
| 735 | difficult-to-find bugs. If the C language included a strong distinction |
---|
| 736 | between integers and booleans then the compiler would find these mistakes |
---|
| 737 | for us... but it doesn't. To help prevent such bugs, always follow this |
---|
| 738 | convention: |
---|
| 739 | |
---|
| 740 | If the name of a function is an action or an imperative command, |
---|
| 741 | the function should return an error-code integer. If the name |
---|
| 742 | is a predicate, the function should return a "succeeded" boolean. |
---|
| 743 | |
---|
| 744 | For example, "add work" is a command, and the add_work() function returns 0 |
---|
| 745 | for success or -EBUSY for failure. In the same way, "PCI device present" is |
---|
| 746 | a predicate, and the pci_dev_present() function returns 1 if it succeeds in |
---|
| 747 | finding a matching device or 0 if it doesn't. |
---|
| 748 | |
---|
| 749 | All EXPORTed functions must respect this convention, and so should all |
---|
| 750 | public functions. Private (static) functions need not, but it is |
---|
| 751 | recommended that they do. |
---|
| 752 | |
---|
| 753 | Functions whose return value is the actual result of a computation, rather |
---|
| 754 | than an indication of whether the computation succeeded, are not subject to |
---|
| 755 | this rule. Generally they indicate failure by returning some out-of-range |
---|
| 756 | result. Typical examples would be functions that return pointers; they use |
---|
| 757 | NULL or the ERR_PTR mechanism to report failure. |
---|
| 758 | |
---|
| 759 | |
---|
| 760 | Chapter 17: Don't re-invent the kernel macros |
---|
| 761 | |
---|
| 762 | The header file include/linux/kernel.h contains a number of macros that |
---|
| 763 | you should use, rather than explicitly coding some variant of them yourself. |
---|
| 764 | For example, if you need to calculate the length of an array, take advantage |
---|
| 765 | of the macro |
---|
| 766 | |
---|
| 767 | #define ARRAY_SIZE(x) (sizeof(x) / sizeof((x)[0])) |
---|
| 768 | |
---|
| 769 | Similarly, if you need to calculate the size of some structure member, use |
---|
| 770 | |
---|
| 771 | #define FIELD_SIZEOF(t, f) (sizeof(((t*)0)->f)) |
---|
| 772 | |
---|
| 773 | There are also min() and max() macros that do strict type checking if you |
---|
| 774 | need them. Feel free to peruse that header file to see what else is already |
---|
| 775 | defined that you shouldn't reproduce in your code. |
---|
| 776 | |
---|
| 777 | |
---|
| 778 | Chapter 18: Editor modelines and other cruft |
---|
| 779 | |
---|
| 780 | Some editors can interpret configuration information embedded in source files, |
---|
| 781 | indicated with special markers. For example, emacs interprets lines marked |
---|
| 782 | like this: |
---|
| 783 | |
---|
| 784 | -*- mode: c -*- |
---|
| 785 | |
---|
| 786 | Or like this: |
---|
| 787 | |
---|
| 788 | /* |
---|
| 789 | Local Variables: |
---|
| 790 | compile-command: "gcc -DMAGIC_DEBUG_FLAG foo.c" |
---|
| 791 | End: |
---|
| 792 | */ |
---|
| 793 | |
---|
| 794 | Vim interprets markers that look like this: |
---|
| 795 | |
---|
| 796 | /* vim:set sw=8 noet */ |
---|
| 797 | |
---|
| 798 | Do not include any of these in source files. People have their own personal |
---|
| 799 | editor configurations, and your source files should not override them. This |
---|
| 800 | includes markers for indentation and mode configuration. People may use their |
---|
| 801 | own custom mode, or may have some other magic method for making indentation |
---|
| 802 | work correctly. |
---|
| 803 | |
---|
| 804 | |
---|
| 805 | |
---|
| 806 | Appendix I: References |
---|
| 807 | |
---|
| 808 | The C Programming Language, Second Edition |
---|
| 809 | by Brian W. Kernighan and Dennis M. Ritchie. |
---|
| 810 | Prentice Hall, Inc., 1988. |
---|
| 811 | ISBN 0-13-110362-8 (paperback), 0-13-110370-9 (hardback). |
---|
| 812 | URL: http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/cbook/ |
---|
| 813 | |
---|
| 814 | The Practice of Programming |
---|
| 815 | by Brian W. Kernighan and Rob Pike. |
---|
| 816 | Addison-Wesley, Inc., 1999. |
---|
| 817 | ISBN 0-201-61586-X. |
---|
| 818 | URL: http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/tpop/ |
---|
| 819 | |
---|
| 820 | GNU manuals - where in compliance with K&R and this text - for cpp, gcc, |
---|
| 821 | gcc internals and indent, all available from http://www.gnu.org/manual/ |
---|
| 822 | |
---|
| 823 | WG14 is the international standardization working group for the programming |
---|
| 824 | language C, URL: http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG14/ |
---|
| 825 | |
---|
| 826 | Kernel CodingStyle, by greg@kroah.com at OLS 2002: |
---|
| 827 | http://www.kroah.com/linux/talks/ols_2002_kernel_codingstyle_talk/html/ |
---|
| 828 | |
---|
| 829 | -- |
---|
| 830 | Last updated on 2007-July-13. |
---|
| 831 | |
---|