432 lines
		
	
	
	
		
			15 KiB
			
		
	
	
	
		
			Text
		
	
	
	
	
	
		
		
			
		
	
	
			432 lines
		
	
	
	
		
			15 KiB
			
		
	
	
	
		
			Text
		
	
	
	
	
	
|   | 
 | ||
|  | 		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. | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Don't put multiple statements on a single line unless you have | ||
|  | something to hide: | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 	if (condition) do_this; | ||
|  | 	  do_something_everytime; | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 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. | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | The limit on the length of lines is 80 columns and this is a hard limit. | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Statements longer than 80 columns will be broken into sensible chunks. | ||
|  | 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. Long strings are as well broken into shorter strings. | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | void fun(int a, int b, int c) | ||
|  | { | ||
|  | 	if (condition) | ||
|  | 		printk(KERN_WARNING "Warning this is a long printk with " | ||
|  | 						"3 parameters a: %u b: %u " | ||
|  | 						"c: %u \n", a, b, c); | ||
|  | 	else | ||
|  | 		next_statement; | ||
|  | } | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 		Chapter 3: Placing Braces | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 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 | ||
|  | 	} | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 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. | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 		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. | ||
|  | See next chapter. | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 		Chapter 5: Functions | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 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. | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 		Chapter 6: Centralized exiting of functions | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 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 | ||
|  | locations and some common work such as cleanup has to be done. | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 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 ;) | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | int fun(int ) | ||
|  | { | ||
|  | 	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; | ||
|  | } | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 		Chapter 7: Commenting | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 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, | ||
|  | you should probably go back to chapter 5 for a while.  You can make | ||
|  | 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. | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 		Chapter 8: You've made a mess of it | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 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: | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | (defun linux-c-mode () | ||
|  |   "C mode with adjusted defaults for use with the Linux kernel." | ||
|  |   (interactive) | ||
|  |   (c-mode) | ||
|  |   (c-set-style "K&R") | ||
|  |   (setq tab-width 8) | ||
|  |   (setq indent-tabs-mode t) | ||
|  |   (setq c-basic-offset 8)) | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | This will define the M-x linux-c-mode command.  When hacking on a | ||
|  | module, if you put the string -*- linux-c -*- somewhere on the first | ||
|  | two lines, this mode will be automatically invoked. Also, you may want | ||
|  | to add | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | (setq auto-mode-alist (cons '("/usr/src/linux.*/.*\\.[ch]$" . linux-c-mode) | ||
|  | 			auto-mode-alist)) | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | to your .emacs file if you want to have linux-c-mode switched on | ||
|  | automagically when you edit source files under /usr/src/linux. | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 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. | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 		Chapter 9: Configuration-files | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | For configuration options (arch/xxx/Kconfig, and all the Kconfig files), | ||
|  | somewhat different indentation is used. | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Help text is indented with 2 spaces. | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | if CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL | ||
|  | 	tristate CONFIG_BOOM | ||
|  | 	default n | ||
|  | 	help | ||
|  | 	  Apply nitroglycerine inside the keyboard (DANGEROUS) | ||
|  | 	bool CONFIG_CHEER | ||
|  | 	depends on CONFIG_BOOM | ||
|  | 	default y | ||
|  | 	help | ||
|  | 	  Output nice messages when you explode | ||
|  | endif | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Generally, CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL should surround all options not considered | ||
|  | stable. All options that are known to trash data (experimental write- | ||
|  | support for file-systems, for instance) should be denoted (DANGEROUS), other | ||
|  | experimental options should be denoted (EXPERIMENTAL). | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 		Chapter 10: Data structures | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 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. | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 		Chapter 11: Macros, Enums, Inline functions and RTL | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 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. | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 		Chapter 12: Printing kernel messages | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Kernel developers like to be seen as literate. Do mind the spelling | ||
|  | of kernel messages to make a good impression. Do not use crippled | ||
|  | words like "dont" and use "do not" or "don't" instead. | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Kernel messages do not have to be terminated with a period. | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Printing numbers in parentheses (%d) adds no value and should be avoided. | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 		Chapter 13: References | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 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, | ||
|  | gcc internals and indent, all available from http://www.gnu.org | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | WG14 is the international standardization working group for the programming | ||
|  | language C, URL: http://std.dkuug.dk/JTC1/SC22/WG14/ | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | -- | ||
|  | Last updated on 16 February 2004 by a community effort on LKML. |