| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		Linux kernel coding style | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | This is a short document describing the preferred coding style for the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | linux kernel.  Coding style is very personal, and I won't _force_ my | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | views on anybody, but this is what goes for anything that I have to be | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | able to maintain, and I'd prefer it for most other things too.  Please | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | at least consider the points made here. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | First off, I'd suggest printing out a copy of the GNU coding standards, | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | and NOT read it.  Burn them, it's a great symbolic gesture. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Anyway, here goes: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	 	Chapter 1: Indentation | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Tabs are 8 characters, and thus indentations are also 8 characters. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | There are heretic movements that try to make indentations 4 (or even 2!) | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | characters deep, and that is akin to trying to define the value of PI to | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | be 3. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Rationale: The whole idea behind indentation is to clearly define where | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | a block of control starts and ends.  Especially when you've been looking | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | at your screen for 20 straight hours, you'll find it a lot easier to see | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | how the indentation works if you have large indentations. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Now, some people will claim that having 8-character indentations makes | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | the code move too far to the right, and makes it hard to read on a | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 80-character terminal screen.  The answer to that is that if you need | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | more than 3 levels of indentation, you're screwed anyway, and should fix | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | your program. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | In short, 8-char indents make things easier to read, and have the added | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | benefit of warning you when you're nesting your functions too deep. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Heed that warning. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-12-10 02:18:56 -08:00
										 |  |  | The preferred way to ease multiple indentation levels in a switch statement is | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | to align the "switch" and its subordinate "case" labels in the same column | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | instead of "double-indenting" the "case" labels.  E.g.: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	switch (suffix) { | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	case 'G': | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	case 'g': | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		mem <<= 30; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		break; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	case 'M': | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	case 'm': | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		mem <<= 20; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		break; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	case 'K': | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	case 'k': | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		mem <<= 10; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		/* fall through */ | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	default: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		break; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	} | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | Don't put multiple statements on a single line unless you have | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | something to hide: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	if (condition) do_this; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	  do_something_everytime; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-12-10 02:18:56 -08:00
										 |  |  | Don't put multiple assignments on a single line either.  Kernel coding style | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | is super simple.  Avoid tricky expressions. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | Outside of comments, documentation and except in Kconfig, spaces are never | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | used for indentation, and the above example is deliberately broken. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Get a decent editor and don't leave whitespace at the end of lines. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		Chapter 2: Breaking long lines and strings | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Coding style is all about readability and maintainability using commonly | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | available tools. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-10-16 23:27:33 -07:00
										 |  |  | The limit on the length of lines is 80 columns and this is a strongly | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | preferred limit. | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2011-08-03 12:19:07 -07:00
										 |  |  | Statements longer than 80 columns will be broken into sensible chunks, unless | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | exceeding 80 columns significantly increases readability and does not hide | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | information. Descendants are always substantially shorter than the parent and | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | are placed substantially to the right. The same applies to function headers | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | with a long argument list. However, never break user-visible strings such as | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | printk messages, because that breaks the ability to grep for them. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-12-10 02:18:56 -08:00
										 |  |  | 		Chapter 3: Placing Braces and Spaces | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | The other issue that always comes up in C styling is the placement of | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | braces.  Unlike the indent size, there are few technical reasons to | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | choose one placement strategy over the other, but the preferred way, as | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | shown to us by the prophets Kernighan and Ritchie, is to put the opening | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | brace last on the line, and put the closing brace first, thusly: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	if (x is true) { | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		we do y | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	} | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-12-10 02:18:56 -08:00
										 |  |  | This applies to all non-function statement blocks (if, switch, for, | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | while, do).  E.g.: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	switch (action) { | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	case KOBJ_ADD: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		return "add"; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	case KOBJ_REMOVE: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		return "remove"; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	case KOBJ_CHANGE: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		return "change"; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	default: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		return NULL; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	} | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | However, there is one special case, namely functions: they have the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | opening brace at the beginning of the next line, thus: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	int function(int x) | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	{ | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		body of function | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	} | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Heretic people all over the world have claimed that this inconsistency | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | is ...  well ...  inconsistent, but all right-thinking people know that | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | (a) K&R are _right_ and (b) K&R are right.  Besides, functions are | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | special anyway (you can't nest them in C). | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Note that the closing brace is empty on a line of its own, _except_ in | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | the cases where it is followed by a continuation of the same statement, | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | ie a "while" in a do-statement or an "else" in an if-statement, like | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | this: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	do { | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		body of do-loop | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	} while (condition); | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | and | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	if (x == y) { | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		.. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	} else if (x > y) { | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		... | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	} else { | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		.... | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	} | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Rationale: K&R. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Also, note that this brace-placement also minimizes the number of empty | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | (or almost empty) lines, without any loss of readability.  Thus, as the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | supply of new-lines on your screen is not a renewable resource (think | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 25-line terminal screens here), you have more empty lines to put | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | comments on. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-05-08 00:30:34 -07:00
										 |  |  | Do not unnecessarily use braces where a single statement will do. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | if (condition) | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	action(); | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2011-03-22 16:35:01 -07:00
										 |  |  | and | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | if (condition) | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	do_this(); | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | else | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	do_that(); | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2011-11-04 11:22:19 -07:00
										 |  |  | This does not apply if only one branch of a conditional statement is a single | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | statement; in the latter case use braces in both branches: | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-05-08 00:30:34 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | if (condition) { | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	do_this(); | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	do_that(); | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | } else { | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	otherwise(); | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | } | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-12-10 02:18:56 -08:00
										 |  |  | 		3.1:  Spaces | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Linux kernel style for use of spaces depends (mostly) on | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | function-versus-keyword usage.  Use a space after (most) keywords.  The | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | notable exceptions are sizeof, typeof, alignof, and __attribute__, which look | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | somewhat like functions (and are usually used with parentheses in Linux, | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | although they are not required in the language, as in: "sizeof info" after | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | "struct fileinfo info;" is declared). | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | So use a space after these keywords: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	if, switch, case, for, do, while | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | but not with sizeof, typeof, alignof, or __attribute__.  E.g., | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	s = sizeof(struct file); | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Do not add spaces around (inside) parenthesized expressions.  This example is | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | *bad*: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	s = sizeof( struct file ); | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | When declaring pointer data or a function that returns a pointer type, the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | preferred use of '*' is adjacent to the data name or function name and not | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | adjacent to the type name.  Examples: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	char *linux_banner; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	unsigned long long memparse(char *ptr, char **retptr); | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	char *match_strdup(substring_t *s); | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Use one space around (on each side of) most binary and ternary operators, | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | such as any of these: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	=  +  -  <  >  *  /  %  |  &  ^  <=  >=  ==  !=  ?  : | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | but no space after unary operators: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	&  *  +  -  ~  !  sizeof  typeof  alignof  __attribute__  defined | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | no space before the postfix increment & decrement unary operators: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	++  -- | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | no space after the prefix increment & decrement unary operators: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	++  -- | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | and no space around the '.' and "->" structure member operators. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-07-15 23:41:37 -07:00
										 |  |  | Do not leave trailing whitespace at the ends of lines.  Some editors with | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | "smart" indentation will insert whitespace at the beginning of new lines as | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | appropriate, so you can start typing the next line of code right away. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | However, some such editors do not remove the whitespace if you end up not | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | putting a line of code there, such as if you leave a blank line.  As a result, | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | you end up with lines containing trailing whitespace. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Git will warn you about patches that introduce trailing whitespace, and can | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | optionally strip the trailing whitespace for you; however, if applying a series | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | of patches, this may make later patches in the series fail by changing their | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | context lines. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		Chapter 4: Naming | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | C is a Spartan language, and so should your naming be.  Unlike Modula-2 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | and Pascal programmers, C programmers do not use cute names like | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | ThisVariableIsATemporaryCounter.  A C programmer would call that | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | variable "tmp", which is much easier to write, and not the least more | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | difficult to understand. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | HOWEVER, while mixed-case names are frowned upon, descriptive names for | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | global variables are a must.  To call a global function "foo" is a | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | shooting offense. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | GLOBAL variables (to be used only if you _really_ need them) need to | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | have descriptive names, as do global functions.  If you have a function | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | that counts the number of active users, you should call that | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | "count_active_users()" or similar, you should _not_ call it "cntusr()". | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Encoding the type of a function into the name (so-called Hungarian | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | notation) is brain damaged - the compiler knows the types anyway and can | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | check those, and it only confuses the programmer.  No wonder MicroSoft | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | makes buggy programs. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | LOCAL variable names should be short, and to the point.  If you have | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | some random integer loop counter, it should probably be called "i". | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Calling it "loop_counter" is non-productive, if there is no chance of it | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | being mis-understood.  Similarly, "tmp" can be just about any type of | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | variable that is used to hold a temporary value. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | If you are afraid to mix up your local variable names, you have another | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | problem, which is called the function-growth-hormone-imbalance syndrome. | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-12-10 02:18:56 -08:00
										 |  |  | See chapter 6 (Functions). | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-06-23 02:05:58 -07:00
										 |  |  | 		Chapter 5: Typedefs | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Please don't use things like "vps_t". | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | It's a _mistake_ to use typedef for structures and pointers. When you see a | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	vps_t a; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | in the source, what does it mean? | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | In contrast, if it says | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	struct virtual_container *a; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | you can actually tell what "a" is. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Lots of people think that typedefs "help readability". Not so. They are | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | useful only for: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  (a) totally opaque objects (where the typedef is actively used to _hide_ | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      what the object is). | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      Example: "pte_t" etc. opaque objects that you can only access using | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      the proper accessor functions. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      NOTE! Opaqueness and "accessor functions" are not good in themselves. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      The reason we have them for things like pte_t etc. is that there | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      really is absolutely _zero_ portably accessible information there. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  (b) Clear integer types, where the abstraction _helps_ avoid confusion | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      whether it is "int" or "long". | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      u8/u16/u32 are perfectly fine typedefs, although they fit into | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      category (d) better than here. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      NOTE! Again - there needs to be a _reason_ for this. If something is | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      "unsigned long", then there's no reason to do | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	typedef unsigned long myflags_t; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      but if there is a clear reason for why it under certain circumstances | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      might be an "unsigned int" and under other configurations might be | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      "unsigned long", then by all means go ahead and use a typedef. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  (c) when you use sparse to literally create a _new_ type for | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      type-checking. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  (d) New types which are identical to standard C99 types, in certain | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      exceptional circumstances. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      Although it would only take a short amount of time for the eyes and | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      brain to become accustomed to the standard types like 'uint32_t', | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      some people object to their use anyway. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      Therefore, the Linux-specific 'u8/u16/u32/u64' types and their | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      signed equivalents which are identical to standard types are | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      permitted -- although they are not mandatory in new code of your | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      own. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      When editing existing code which already uses one or the other set | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      of types, you should conform to the existing choices in that code. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  (e) Types safe for use in userspace. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      In certain structures which are visible to userspace, we cannot | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      require C99 types and cannot use the 'u32' form above. Thus, we | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      use __u32 and similar types in all structures which are shared | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |      with userspace. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Maybe there are other cases too, but the rule should basically be to NEVER | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | EVER use a typedef unless you can clearly match one of those rules. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | In general, a pointer, or a struct that has elements that can reasonably | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | be directly accessed should _never_ be a typedef. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		Chapter 6: Functions | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Functions should be short and sweet, and do just one thing.  They should | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | fit on one or two screenfuls of text (the ISO/ANSI screen size is 80x24, | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | as we all know), and do one thing and do that well. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | The maximum length of a function is inversely proportional to the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | complexity and indentation level of that function.  So, if you have a | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | conceptually simple function that is just one long (but simple) | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | case-statement, where you have to do lots of small things for a lot of | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | different cases, it's OK to have a longer function. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | However, if you have a complex function, and you suspect that a | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | less-than-gifted first-year high-school student might not even | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | understand what the function is all about, you should adhere to the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | maximum limits all the more closely.  Use helper functions with | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | descriptive names (you can ask the compiler to in-line them if you think | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | it's performance-critical, and it will probably do a better job of it | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | than you would have done). | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Another measure of the function is the number of local variables.  They | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | shouldn't exceed 5-10, or you're doing something wrong.  Re-think the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | function, and split it into smaller pieces.  A human brain can | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | generally easily keep track of about 7 different things, anything more | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | and it gets confused.  You know you're brilliant, but maybe you'd like | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | to understand what you did 2 weeks from now. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-12-10 02:18:56 -08:00
										 |  |  | In source files, separate functions with one blank line.  If the function is | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | exported, the EXPORT* macro for it should follow immediately after the closing | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | function brace line.  E.g.: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | int system_is_up(void) | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | { | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	return system_state == SYSTEM_RUNNING; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | } | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | EXPORT_SYMBOL(system_is_up); | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | In function prototypes, include parameter names with their data types. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Although this is not required by the C language, it is preferred in Linux | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | because it is a simple way to add valuable information for the reader. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-06-23 02:05:58 -07:00
										 |  |  | 		Chapter 7: Centralized exiting of functions | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Albeit deprecated by some people, the equivalent of the goto statement is | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | used frequently by compilers in form of the unconditional jump instruction. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | The goto statement comes in handy when a function exits from multiple | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2013-07-03 15:08:08 -07:00
										 |  |  | locations and some common work such as cleanup has to be done.  If there is no | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | cleanup needed then just return directly. | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | The rationale is: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | - unconditional statements are easier to understand and follow | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | - nesting is reduced | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | - errors by not updating individual exit points when making | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     modifications are prevented | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | - saves the compiler work to optimize redundant code away ;) | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-01-09 20:53:51 -08:00
										 |  |  | int fun(int a) | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | { | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	int result = 0; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	char *buffer = kmalloc(SIZE); | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	if (buffer == NULL) | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		return -ENOMEM; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	if (condition1) { | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		while (loop1) { | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 			... | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		} | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		result = 1; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		goto out; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	} | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	... | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | out: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	kfree(buffer); | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	return result; | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | } | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-06-23 02:05:58 -07:00
										 |  |  | 		Chapter 8: Commenting | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Comments are good, but there is also a danger of over-commenting.  NEVER | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | try to explain HOW your code works in a comment: it's much better to | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | write the code so that the _working_ is obvious, and it's a waste of | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | time to explain badly written code. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Generally, you want your comments to tell WHAT your code does, not HOW. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Also, try to avoid putting comments inside a function body: if the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | function is so complex that you need to separately comment parts of it, | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-12-10 02:18:56 -08:00
										 |  |  | you should probably go back to chapter 6 for a while.  You can make | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | small comments to note or warn about something particularly clever (or | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | ugly), but try to avoid excess.  Instead, put the comments at the head | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | of the function, telling people what it does, and possibly WHY it does | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | it. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-12-10 02:18:56 -08:00
										 |  |  | When commenting the kernel API functions, please use the kernel-doc format. | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-09-10 00:26:44 -07:00
										 |  |  | See the files Documentation/kernel-doc-nano-HOWTO.txt and scripts/kernel-doc | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | for details. | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-12-10 02:18:56 -08:00
										 |  |  | Linux style for comments is the C89 "/* ... */" style. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Don't use C99-style "// ..." comments. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | The preferred style for long (multi-line) comments is: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	/* | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	 * This is the preferred style for multi-line | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	 * comments in the Linux kernel source code. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	 * Please use it consistently. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	 * | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	 * Description:  A column of asterisks on the left side, | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	 * with beginning and ending almost-blank lines. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	 */ | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2012-10-04 17:13:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | For files in net/ and drivers/net/ the preferred style for long (multi-line) | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | comments is a little different. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	/* The preferred comment style for files in net/ and drivers/net | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	 * looks like this. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	 * | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	 * It is nearly the same as the generally preferred comment style, | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	 * but there is no initial almost-blank line. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	 */ | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-12-10 02:18:56 -08:00
										 |  |  | It's also important to comment data, whether they are basic types or derived | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | types.  To this end, use just one data declaration per line (no commas for | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | multiple data declarations).  This leaves you room for a small comment on each | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | item, explaining its use. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-06-23 02:05:58 -07:00
										 |  |  | 		Chapter 9: You've made a mess of it | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | That's OK, we all do.  You've probably been told by your long-time Unix | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | user helper that "GNU emacs" automatically formats the C sources for | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | you, and you've noticed that yes, it does do that, but the defaults it | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | uses are less than desirable (in fact, they are worse than random | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | typing - an infinite number of monkeys typing into GNU emacs would never | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | make a good program). | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | So, you can either get rid of GNU emacs, or change it to use saner | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | values.  To do the latter, you can stick the following in your .emacs file: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2008-07-25 01:45:51 -07:00
										 |  |  | (defun c-lineup-arglist-tabs-only (ignored) | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   "Line up argument lists by tabs, not spaces" | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   (let* ((anchor (c-langelem-pos c-syntactic-element)) | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	 (column (c-langelem-2nd-pos c-syntactic-element)) | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	 (offset (- (1+ column) anchor)) | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	 (steps (floor offset c-basic-offset))) | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |     (* (max steps 1) | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |        c-basic-offset))) | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-01-29 16:28:16 -08:00
										 |  |  | (add-hook 'c-mode-common-hook | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |           (lambda () | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |             ;; Add kernel style | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |             (c-add-style | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |              "linux-tabs-only" | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |              '("linux" (c-offsets-alist | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |                         (arglist-cont-nonempty | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |                          c-lineup-gcc-asm-reg | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |                          c-lineup-arglist-tabs-only)))))) | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2008-07-25 01:45:51 -07:00
										 |  |  | (add-hook 'c-mode-hook | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |           (lambda () | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |             (let ((filename (buffer-file-name))) | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |               ;; Enable kernel mode for the appropriate files | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |               (when (and filename | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-01-29 16:28:28 -08:00
										 |  |  |                          (string-match (expand-file-name "~/src/linux-trees") | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |                                        filename)) | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2008-07-25 01:45:51 -07:00
										 |  |  |                 (setq indent-tabs-mode t) | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-01-29 16:28:16 -08:00
										 |  |  |                 (c-set-style "linux-tabs-only"))))) | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2008-07-25 01:45:51 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | This will make emacs go better with the kernel coding style for C | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | files below ~/src/linux-trees. | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | But even if you fail in getting emacs to do sane formatting, not | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | everything is lost: use "indent". | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Now, again, GNU indent has the same brain-dead settings that GNU emacs | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | has, which is why you need to give it a few command line options. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | However, that's not too bad, because even the makers of GNU indent | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | recognize the authority of K&R (the GNU people aren't evil, they are | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | just severely misguided in this matter), so you just give indent the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | options "-kr -i8" (stands for "K&R, 8 character indents"), or use | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | "scripts/Lindent", which indents in the latest style. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | "indent" has a lot of options, and especially when it comes to comment | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | re-formatting you may want to take a look at the man page.  But | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | remember: "indent" is not a fix for bad programming. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-05-23 13:57:42 -07:00
										 |  |  | 		Chapter 10: Kconfig configuration files | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-05-23 13:57:42 -07:00
										 |  |  | For all of the Kconfig* configuration files throughout the source tree, | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | the indentation is somewhat different.  Lines under a "config" definition | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | are indented with one tab, while help text is indented an additional two | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | spaces.  Example: | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-05-23 13:57:42 -07:00
										 |  |  | config AUDIT | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	bool "Auditing support" | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	depends on NET | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 	help | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-05-23 13:57:42 -07:00
										 |  |  | 	  Enable auditing infrastructure that can be used with another | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	  kernel subsystem, such as SELinux (which requires this for | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	  logging of avc messages output).  Does not do system-call | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	  auditing without CONFIG_AUDITSYSCALL. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2012-10-02 11:16:15 -07:00
										 |  |  | Seriously dangerous features (such as write support for certain | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-05-23 13:57:42 -07:00
										 |  |  | filesystems) should advertise this prominently in their prompt string: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | config ADFS_FS_RW | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	bool "ADFS write support (DANGEROUS)" | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	depends on ADFS_FS | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	... | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-05-23 13:57:42 -07:00
										 |  |  | For full documentation on the configuration files, see the file | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Documentation/kbuild/kconfig-language.txt. | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-06-23 02:05:58 -07:00
										 |  |  | 		Chapter 11: Data structures | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Data structures that have visibility outside the single-threaded | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | environment they are created and destroyed in should always have | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | reference counts.  In the kernel, garbage collection doesn't exist (and | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | outside the kernel garbage collection is slow and inefficient), which | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | means that you absolutely _have_ to reference count all your uses. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Reference counting means that you can avoid locking, and allows multiple | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | users to have access to the data structure in parallel - and not having | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | to worry about the structure suddenly going away from under them just | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | because they slept or did something else for a while. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Note that locking is _not_ a replacement for reference counting. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Locking is used to keep data structures coherent, while reference | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | counting is a memory management technique.  Usually both are needed, and | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | they are not to be confused with each other. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Many data structures can indeed have two levels of reference counting, | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | when there are users of different "classes".  The subclass count counts | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | the number of subclass users, and decrements the global count just once | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | when the subclass count goes to zero. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Examples of this kind of "multi-level-reference-counting" can be found in | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | memory management ("struct mm_struct": mm_users and mm_count), and in | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | filesystem code ("struct super_block": s_count and s_active). | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Remember: if another thread can find your data structure, and you don't | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | have a reference count on it, you almost certainly have a bug. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-06-23 02:05:58 -07:00
										 |  |  | 		Chapter 12: Macros, Enums and RTL | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Names of macros defining constants and labels in enums are capitalized. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | #define CONSTANT 0x12345 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Enums are preferred when defining several related constants. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | CAPITALIZED macro names are appreciated but macros resembling functions | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | may be named in lower case. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Generally, inline functions are preferable to macros resembling functions. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Macros with multiple statements should be enclosed in a do - while block: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | #define macrofun(a, b, c) 			\ | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	do {					\ | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		if (a == 5)			\ | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 			do_this(b, c);		\ | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	} while (0) | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Things to avoid when using macros: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 1) macros that affect control flow: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | #define FOO(x)					\ | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	do {					\ | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 		if (blah(x) < 0)		\ | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 			return -EBUGGERED;	\ | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	} while(0) | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | is a _very_ bad idea.  It looks like a function call but exits the "calling" | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | function; don't break the internal parsers of those who will read the code. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 2) macros that depend on having a local variable with a magic name: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | #define FOO(val) bar(index, val) | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | might look like a good thing, but it's confusing as hell when one reads the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | code and it's prone to breakage from seemingly innocent changes. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 3) macros with arguments that are used as l-values: FOO(x) = y; will | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | bite you if somebody e.g. turns FOO into an inline function. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 4) forgetting about precedence: macros defining constants using expressions | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | must enclose the expression in parentheses. Beware of similar issues with | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | macros using parameters. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | #define CONSTANT 0x4000 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | #define CONSTEXP (CONSTANT | 3) | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | The cpp manual deals with macros exhaustively. The gcc internals manual also | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | covers RTL which is used frequently with assembly language in the kernel. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-06-23 02:05:58 -07:00
										 |  |  | 		Chapter 13: Printing kernel messages | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Kernel developers like to be seen as literate. Do mind the spelling | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | of kernel messages to make a good impression. Do not use crippled | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-07-13 16:32:09 -07:00
										 |  |  | words like "dont"; use "do not" or "don't" instead.  Make the messages | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | concise, clear, and unambiguous. | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Kernel messages do not have to be terminated with a period. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Printing numbers in parentheses (%d) adds no value and should be avoided. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-07-13 16:32:09 -07:00
										 |  |  | There are a number of driver model diagnostic macros in <linux/device.h> | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | which you should use to make sure messages are matched to the right device | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | and driver, and are tagged with the right level:  dev_err(), dev_warn(), | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | dev_info(), and so forth.  For messages that aren't associated with a | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2011-03-15 16:11:52 -07:00
										 |  |  | particular device, <linux/printk.h> defines pr_debug() and pr_info(). | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-07-13 16:32:09 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Coming up with good debugging messages can be quite a challenge; and once | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | you have them, they can be a huge help for remote troubleshooting.  Such | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | messages should be compiled out when the DEBUG symbol is not defined (that | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | is, by default they are not included).  When you use dev_dbg() or pr_debug(), | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | that's automatic.  Many subsystems have Kconfig options to turn on -DDEBUG. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | A related convention uses VERBOSE_DEBUG to add dev_vdbg() messages to the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | ones already enabled by DEBUG. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-06-23 02:05:58 -07:00
										 |  |  | 		Chapter 14: Allocating memory | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-09-16 19:28:11 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | The kernel provides the following general purpose memory allocators: | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2012-05-31 16:26:04 -07:00
										 |  |  | kmalloc(), kzalloc(), kmalloc_array(), kcalloc(), vmalloc(), and | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | vzalloc().  Please refer to the API documentation for further information | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | about them. | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-09-16 19:28:11 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | The preferred form for passing a size of a struct is the following: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	p = kmalloc(sizeof(*p), ...); | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | The alternative form where struct name is spelled out hurts readability and | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | introduces an opportunity for a bug when the pointer variable type is changed | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | but the corresponding sizeof that is passed to a memory allocator is not. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Casting the return value which is a void pointer is redundant. The conversion | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | from void pointer to any other pointer type is guaranteed by the C programming | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | language. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2012-05-31 16:26:04 -07:00
										 |  |  | The preferred form for allocating an array is the following: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	p = kmalloc_array(n, sizeof(...), ...); | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | The preferred form for allocating a zeroed array is the following: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	p = kcalloc(n, sizeof(...), ...); | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Both forms check for overflow on the allocation size n * sizeof(...), | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | and return NULL if that occurred. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-09-16 19:28:11 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-06-23 02:05:58 -07:00
										 |  |  | 		Chapter 15: The inline disease | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-01-08 01:05:04 -08:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | There appears to be a common misperception that gcc has a magic "make me | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | faster" speedup option called "inline". While the use of inlines can be | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-05-08 00:31:06 -07:00
										 |  |  | appropriate (for example as a means of replacing macros, see Chapter 12), it | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-01-08 01:05:04 -08:00
										 |  |  | very often is not. Abundant use of the inline keyword leads to a much bigger | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | kernel, which in turn slows the system as a whole down, due to a bigger | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | icache footprint for the CPU and simply because there is less memory | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | available for the pagecache. Just think about it; a pagecache miss causes a | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2009-04-23 11:37:37 +02:00
										 |  |  | disk seek, which easily takes 5 milliseconds. There are a LOT of cpu cycles | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | that can go into these 5 milliseconds. | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-01-08 01:05:04 -08:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | A reasonable rule of thumb is to not put inline at functions that have more | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | than 3 lines of code in them. An exception to this rule are the cases where | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | a parameter is known to be a compiletime constant, and as a result of this | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | constantness you *know* the compiler will be able to optimize most of your | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | function away at compile time. For a good example of this later case, see | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | the kmalloc() inline function. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Often people argue that adding inline to functions that are static and used | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | only once is always a win since there is no space tradeoff. While this is | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | technically correct, gcc is capable of inlining these automatically without | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | help, and the maintenance issue of removing the inline when a second user | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | appears outweighs the potential value of the hint that tells gcc to do | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | something it would have done anyway. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-09-29 02:01:21 -07:00
										 |  |  | 		Chapter 16: Function return values and names | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Functions can return values of many different kinds, and one of the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | most common is a value indicating whether the function succeeded or | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | failed.  Such a value can be represented as an error-code integer | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | (-Exxx = failure, 0 = success) or a "succeeded" boolean (0 = failure, | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | non-zero = success). | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Mixing up these two sorts of representations is a fertile source of | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | difficult-to-find bugs.  If the C language included a strong distinction | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | between integers and booleans then the compiler would find these mistakes | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | for us... but it doesn't.  To help prevent such bugs, always follow this | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | convention: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	If the name of a function is an action or an imperative command, | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	the function should return an error-code integer.  If the name | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	is a predicate, the function should return a "succeeded" boolean. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | For example, "add work" is a command, and the add_work() function returns 0 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | for success or -EBUSY for failure.  In the same way, "PCI device present" is | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | a predicate, and the pci_dev_present() function returns 1 if it succeeds in | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | finding a matching device or 0 if it doesn't. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | All EXPORTed functions must respect this convention, and so should all | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | public functions.  Private (static) functions need not, but it is | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | recommended that they do. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Functions whose return value is the actual result of a computation, rather | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | than an indication of whether the computation succeeded, are not subject to | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | this rule.  Generally they indicate failure by returning some out-of-range | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | result.  Typical examples would be functions that return pointers; they use | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | NULL or the ERR_PTR mechanism to report failure. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-12-22 01:09:11 -08:00
										 |  |  | 		Chapter 17:  Don't re-invent the kernel macros | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | The header file include/linux/kernel.h contains a number of macros that | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | you should use, rather than explicitly coding some variant of them yourself. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | For example, if you need to calculate the length of an array, take advantage | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | of the macro | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   #define ARRAY_SIZE(x) (sizeof(x) / sizeof((x)[0])) | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Similarly, if you need to calculate the size of some structure member, use | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |   #define FIELD_SIZEOF(t, f) (sizeof(((t*)0)->f)) | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | There are also min() and max() macros that do strict type checking if you | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | need them.  Feel free to peruse that header file to see what else is already | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | defined that you shouldn't reproduce in your code. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2007-07-15 23:41:37 -07:00
										 |  |  | 		Chapter 18:  Editor modelines and other cruft | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Some editors can interpret configuration information embedded in source files, | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | indicated with special markers.  For example, emacs interprets lines marked | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | like this: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | -*- mode: c -*- | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Or like this: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | /* | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Local Variables: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | compile-command: "gcc -DMAGIC_DEBUG_FLAG foo.c" | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | End: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | */ | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Vim interprets markers that look like this: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | /* vim:set sw=8 noet */ | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Do not include any of these in source files.  People have their own personal | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | editor configurations, and your source files should not override them.  This | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | includes markers for indentation and mode configuration.  People may use their | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | own custom mode, or may have some other magic method for making indentation | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | work correctly. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2012-03-30 13:37:10 -07:00
										 |  |  | 		Chapter 19:  Inline assembly | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | In architecture-specific code, you may need to use inline assembly to interface | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | with CPU or platform functionality.  Don't hesitate to do so when necessary. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | However, don't use inline assembly gratuitously when C can do the job.  You can | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | and should poke hardware from C when possible. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Consider writing simple helper functions that wrap common bits of inline | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | assembly, rather than repeatedly writing them with slight variations.  Remember | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | that inline assembly can use C parameters. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Large, non-trivial assembly functions should go in .S files, with corresponding | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | C prototypes defined in C header files.  The C prototypes for assembly | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | functions should use "asmlinkage". | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | You may need to mark your asm statement as volatile, to prevent GCC from | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | removing it if GCC doesn't notice any side effects.  You don't always need to | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | do so, though, and doing so unnecessarily can limit optimization. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | When writing a single inline assembly statement containing multiple | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | instructions, put each instruction on a separate line in a separate quoted | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | string, and end each string except the last with \n\t to properly indent the | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | next instruction in the assembly output: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	asm ("magic %reg1, #42\n\t" | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	     "more_magic %reg2, %reg3" | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 	     : /* outputs */ : /* inputs */ : /* clobbers */); | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-01-08 01:05:04 -08:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-06-23 02:05:58 -07:00
										 |  |  | 		Appendix I: References | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | The C Programming Language, Second Edition | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | by Brian W. Kernighan and Dennis M. Ritchie. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Prentice Hall, Inc., 1988. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | ISBN 0-13-110362-8 (paperback), 0-13-110370-9 (hardback). | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | URL: http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/cbook/ | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | The Practice of Programming | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | by Brian W. Kernighan and Rob Pike. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Addison-Wesley, Inc., 1999. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | ISBN 0-201-61586-X. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | URL: http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/tpop/ | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | GNU manuals - where in compliance with K&R and this text - for cpp, gcc, | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-01-08 01:02:49 -08:00
										 |  |  | gcc internals and indent, all available from http://www.gnu.org/manual/ | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | WG14 is the international standardization working group for the programming | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2006-01-08 01:02:49 -08:00
										 |  |  | language C, URL: http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG14/ | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | Kernel CodingStyle, by greg@kroah.com at OLS 2002: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  | http://www.kroah.com/linux/talks/ols_2002_kernel_codingstyle_talk/html/ | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00
										 |  |  | 
 |