| Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 1 |  | 
|  | 2 | Linux kernel coding style | 
|  | 3 |  | 
|  | 4 | This is a short document describing the preferred coding style for the | 
|  | 5 | linux kernel.  Coding style is very personal, and I won't _force_ my | 
|  | 6 | views on anybody, but this is what goes for anything that I have to be | 
|  | 7 | able to maintain, and I'd prefer it for most other things too.  Please | 
|  | 8 | at least consider the points made here. | 
|  | 9 |  | 
|  | 10 | First off, I'd suggest printing out a copy of the GNU coding standards, | 
|  | 11 | and NOT read it.  Burn them, it's a great symbolic gesture. | 
|  | 12 |  | 
|  | 13 | Anyway, here goes: | 
|  | 14 |  | 
|  | 15 |  | 
|  | 16 | Chapter 1: Indentation | 
|  | 17 |  | 
|  | 18 | Tabs are 8 characters, and thus indentations are also 8 characters. | 
|  | 19 | There are heretic movements that try to make indentations 4 (or even 2!) | 
|  | 20 | characters deep, and that is akin to trying to define the value of PI to | 
|  | 21 | be 3. | 
|  | 22 |  | 
|  | 23 | Rationale: The whole idea behind indentation is to clearly define where | 
|  | 24 | a block of control starts and ends.  Especially when you've been looking | 
|  | 25 | at your screen for 20 straight hours, you'll find it a lot easier to see | 
|  | 26 | how the indentation works if you have large indentations. | 
|  | 27 |  | 
|  | 28 | Now, some people will claim that having 8-character indentations makes | 
|  | 29 | the code move too far to the right, and makes it hard to read on a | 
|  | 30 | 80-character terminal screen.  The answer to that is that if you need | 
|  | 31 | more than 3 levels of indentation, you're screwed anyway, and should fix | 
|  | 32 | your program. | 
|  | 33 |  | 
|  | 34 | In short, 8-char indents make things easier to read, and have the added | 
|  | 35 | benefit of warning you when you're nesting your functions too deep. | 
|  | 36 | Heed that warning. | 
|  | 37 |  | 
| Randy Dunlap | b3fc994 | 2006-12-10 02:18:56 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 38 | The preferred way to ease multiple indentation levels in a switch statement is | 
|  | 39 | to align the "switch" and its subordinate "case" labels in the same column | 
|  | 40 | instead of "double-indenting" the "case" labels.  E.g.: | 
|  | 41 |  | 
|  | 42 | switch (suffix) { | 
|  | 43 | case 'G': | 
|  | 44 | case 'g': | 
|  | 45 | mem <<= 30; | 
|  | 46 | break; | 
|  | 47 | case 'M': | 
|  | 48 | case 'm': | 
|  | 49 | mem <<= 20; | 
|  | 50 | break; | 
|  | 51 | case 'K': | 
|  | 52 | case 'k': | 
|  | 53 | mem <<= 10; | 
|  | 54 | /* fall through */ | 
|  | 55 | default: | 
|  | 56 | break; | 
|  | 57 | } | 
|  | 58 |  | 
|  | 59 |  | 
| Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 60 | Don't put multiple statements on a single line unless you have | 
|  | 61 | something to hide: | 
|  | 62 |  | 
|  | 63 | if (condition) do_this; | 
|  | 64 | do_something_everytime; | 
|  | 65 |  | 
| Randy Dunlap | b3fc994 | 2006-12-10 02:18:56 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 66 | Don't put multiple assignments on a single line either.  Kernel coding style | 
|  | 67 | is super simple.  Avoid tricky expressions. | 
|  | 68 |  | 
| Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 69 | Outside of comments, documentation and except in Kconfig, spaces are never | 
|  | 70 | used for indentation, and the above example is deliberately broken. | 
|  | 71 |  | 
|  | 72 | Get a decent editor and don't leave whitespace at the end of lines. | 
|  | 73 |  | 
|  | 74 |  | 
|  | 75 | Chapter 2: Breaking long lines and strings | 
|  | 76 |  | 
|  | 77 | Coding style is all about readability and maintainability using commonly | 
|  | 78 | available tools. | 
|  | 79 |  | 
|  | 80 | The limit on the length of lines is 80 columns and this is a hard limit. | 
|  | 81 |  | 
|  | 82 | Statements longer than 80 columns will be broken into sensible chunks. | 
|  | 83 | Descendants are always substantially shorter than the parent and are placed | 
|  | 84 | substantially to the right. The same applies to function headers with a long | 
|  | 85 | argument list. Long strings are as well broken into shorter strings. | 
|  | 86 |  | 
|  | 87 | void fun(int a, int b, int c) | 
|  | 88 | { | 
|  | 89 | if (condition) | 
|  | 90 | printk(KERN_WARNING "Warning this is a long printk with " | 
|  | 91 | "3 parameters a: %u b: %u " | 
|  | 92 | "c: %u \n", a, b, c); | 
|  | 93 | else | 
|  | 94 | next_statement; | 
|  | 95 | } | 
|  | 96 |  | 
| Randy Dunlap | b3fc994 | 2006-12-10 02:18:56 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 97 | Chapter 3: Placing Braces and Spaces | 
| Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 98 |  | 
|  | 99 | The other issue that always comes up in C styling is the placement of | 
|  | 100 | braces.  Unlike the indent size, there are few technical reasons to | 
|  | 101 | choose one placement strategy over the other, but the preferred way, as | 
|  | 102 | shown to us by the prophets Kernighan and Ritchie, is to put the opening | 
|  | 103 | brace last on the line, and put the closing brace first, thusly: | 
|  | 104 |  | 
|  | 105 | if (x is true) { | 
|  | 106 | we do y | 
|  | 107 | } | 
|  | 108 |  | 
| Randy Dunlap | b3fc994 | 2006-12-10 02:18:56 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 109 | This applies to all non-function statement blocks (if, switch, for, | 
|  | 110 | while, do).  E.g.: | 
|  | 111 |  | 
|  | 112 | switch (action) { | 
|  | 113 | case KOBJ_ADD: | 
|  | 114 | return "add"; | 
|  | 115 | case KOBJ_REMOVE: | 
|  | 116 | return "remove"; | 
|  | 117 | case KOBJ_CHANGE: | 
|  | 118 | return "change"; | 
|  | 119 | default: | 
|  | 120 | return NULL; | 
|  | 121 | } | 
|  | 122 |  | 
| Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 123 | However, there is one special case, namely functions: they have the | 
|  | 124 | opening brace at the beginning of the next line, thus: | 
|  | 125 |  | 
|  | 126 | int function(int x) | 
|  | 127 | { | 
|  | 128 | body of function | 
|  | 129 | } | 
|  | 130 |  | 
|  | 131 | Heretic people all over the world have claimed that this inconsistency | 
|  | 132 | is ...  well ...  inconsistent, but all right-thinking people know that | 
|  | 133 | (a) K&R are _right_ and (b) K&R are right.  Besides, functions are | 
|  | 134 | special anyway (you can't nest them in C). | 
|  | 135 |  | 
|  | 136 | Note that the closing brace is empty on a line of its own, _except_ in | 
|  | 137 | the cases where it is followed by a continuation of the same statement, | 
|  | 138 | ie a "while" in a do-statement or an "else" in an if-statement, like | 
|  | 139 | this: | 
|  | 140 |  | 
|  | 141 | do { | 
|  | 142 | body of do-loop | 
|  | 143 | } while (condition); | 
|  | 144 |  | 
|  | 145 | and | 
|  | 146 |  | 
|  | 147 | if (x == y) { | 
|  | 148 | .. | 
|  | 149 | } else if (x > y) { | 
|  | 150 | ... | 
|  | 151 | } else { | 
|  | 152 | .... | 
|  | 153 | } | 
|  | 154 |  | 
|  | 155 | Rationale: K&R. | 
|  | 156 |  | 
|  | 157 | Also, note that this brace-placement also minimizes the number of empty | 
|  | 158 | (or almost empty) lines, without any loss of readability.  Thus, as the | 
|  | 159 | supply of new-lines on your screen is not a renewable resource (think | 
|  | 160 | 25-line terminal screens here), you have more empty lines to put | 
|  | 161 | comments on. | 
|  | 162 |  | 
| Randy Dunlap | b3fc994 | 2006-12-10 02:18:56 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 163 | 3.1:  Spaces | 
|  | 164 |  | 
|  | 165 | Linux kernel style for use of spaces depends (mostly) on | 
|  | 166 | function-versus-keyword usage.  Use a space after (most) keywords.  The | 
|  | 167 | notable exceptions are sizeof, typeof, alignof, and __attribute__, which look | 
|  | 168 | somewhat like functions (and are usually used with parentheses in Linux, | 
|  | 169 | although they are not required in the language, as in: "sizeof info" after | 
|  | 170 | "struct fileinfo info;" is declared). | 
|  | 171 |  | 
|  | 172 | So use a space after these keywords: | 
|  | 173 | if, switch, case, for, do, while | 
|  | 174 | but not with sizeof, typeof, alignof, or __attribute__.  E.g., | 
|  | 175 | s = sizeof(struct file); | 
|  | 176 |  | 
|  | 177 | Do not add spaces around (inside) parenthesized expressions.  This example is | 
|  | 178 | *bad*: | 
|  | 179 |  | 
|  | 180 | s = sizeof( struct file ); | 
|  | 181 |  | 
|  | 182 | When declaring pointer data or a function that returns a pointer type, the | 
|  | 183 | preferred use of '*' is adjacent to the data name or function name and not | 
|  | 184 | adjacent to the type name.  Examples: | 
|  | 185 |  | 
|  | 186 | char *linux_banner; | 
|  | 187 | unsigned long long memparse(char *ptr, char **retptr); | 
|  | 188 | char *match_strdup(substring_t *s); | 
|  | 189 |  | 
|  | 190 | Use one space around (on each side of) most binary and ternary operators, | 
|  | 191 | such as any of these: | 
|  | 192 |  | 
|  | 193 | =  +  -  <  >  *  /  %  |  &  ^  <=  >=  ==  !=  ?  : | 
|  | 194 |  | 
|  | 195 | but no space after unary operators: | 
|  | 196 | &  *  +  -  ~  !  sizeof  typeof  alignof  __attribute__  defined | 
|  | 197 |  | 
|  | 198 | no space before the postfix increment & decrement unary operators: | 
|  | 199 | ++  -- | 
|  | 200 |  | 
|  | 201 | no space after the prefix increment & decrement unary operators: | 
|  | 202 | ++  -- | 
|  | 203 |  | 
|  | 204 | and no space around the '.' and "->" structure member operators. | 
|  | 205 |  | 
| Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 206 |  | 
|  | 207 | Chapter 4: Naming | 
|  | 208 |  | 
|  | 209 | C is a Spartan language, and so should your naming be.  Unlike Modula-2 | 
|  | 210 | and Pascal programmers, C programmers do not use cute names like | 
|  | 211 | ThisVariableIsATemporaryCounter.  A C programmer would call that | 
|  | 212 | variable "tmp", which is much easier to write, and not the least more | 
|  | 213 | difficult to understand. | 
|  | 214 |  | 
|  | 215 | HOWEVER, while mixed-case names are frowned upon, descriptive names for | 
|  | 216 | global variables are a must.  To call a global function "foo" is a | 
|  | 217 | shooting offense. | 
|  | 218 |  | 
|  | 219 | GLOBAL variables (to be used only if you _really_ need them) need to | 
|  | 220 | have descriptive names, as do global functions.  If you have a function | 
|  | 221 | that counts the number of active users, you should call that | 
|  | 222 | "count_active_users()" or similar, you should _not_ call it "cntusr()". | 
|  | 223 |  | 
|  | 224 | Encoding the type of a function into the name (so-called Hungarian | 
|  | 225 | notation) is brain damaged - the compiler knows the types anyway and can | 
|  | 226 | check those, and it only confuses the programmer.  No wonder MicroSoft | 
|  | 227 | makes buggy programs. | 
|  | 228 |  | 
|  | 229 | LOCAL variable names should be short, and to the point.  If you have | 
|  | 230 | some random integer loop counter, it should probably be called "i". | 
|  | 231 | Calling it "loop_counter" is non-productive, if there is no chance of it | 
|  | 232 | being mis-understood.  Similarly, "tmp" can be just about any type of | 
|  | 233 | variable that is used to hold a temporary value. | 
|  | 234 |  | 
|  | 235 | If you are afraid to mix up your local variable names, you have another | 
|  | 236 | problem, which is called the function-growth-hormone-imbalance syndrome. | 
| Randy Dunlap | b3fc994 | 2006-12-10 02:18:56 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 237 | See chapter 6 (Functions). | 
| Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 238 |  | 
|  | 239 |  | 
| Randy Dunlap | 226a6b8 | 2006-06-23 02:05:58 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 240 | Chapter 5: Typedefs | 
|  | 241 |  | 
|  | 242 | Please don't use things like "vps_t". | 
|  | 243 |  | 
|  | 244 | It's a _mistake_ to use typedef for structures and pointers. When you see a | 
|  | 245 |  | 
|  | 246 | vps_t a; | 
|  | 247 |  | 
|  | 248 | in the source, what does it mean? | 
|  | 249 |  | 
|  | 250 | In contrast, if it says | 
|  | 251 |  | 
|  | 252 | struct virtual_container *a; | 
|  | 253 |  | 
|  | 254 | you can actually tell what "a" is. | 
|  | 255 |  | 
|  | 256 | Lots of people think that typedefs "help readability". Not so. They are | 
|  | 257 | useful only for: | 
|  | 258 |  | 
|  | 259 | (a) totally opaque objects (where the typedef is actively used to _hide_ | 
|  | 260 | what the object is). | 
|  | 261 |  | 
|  | 262 | Example: "pte_t" etc. opaque objects that you can only access using | 
|  | 263 | the proper accessor functions. | 
|  | 264 |  | 
|  | 265 | NOTE! Opaqueness and "accessor functions" are not good in themselves. | 
|  | 266 | The reason we have them for things like pte_t etc. is that there | 
|  | 267 | really is absolutely _zero_ portably accessible information there. | 
|  | 268 |  | 
|  | 269 | (b) Clear integer types, where the abstraction _helps_ avoid confusion | 
|  | 270 | whether it is "int" or "long". | 
|  | 271 |  | 
|  | 272 | u8/u16/u32 are perfectly fine typedefs, although they fit into | 
|  | 273 | category (d) better than here. | 
|  | 274 |  | 
|  | 275 | NOTE! Again - there needs to be a _reason_ for this. If something is | 
|  | 276 | "unsigned long", then there's no reason to do | 
|  | 277 |  | 
|  | 278 | typedef unsigned long myflags_t; | 
|  | 279 |  | 
|  | 280 | but if there is a clear reason for why it under certain circumstances | 
|  | 281 | might be an "unsigned int" and under other configurations might be | 
|  | 282 | "unsigned long", then by all means go ahead and use a typedef. | 
|  | 283 |  | 
|  | 284 | (c) when you use sparse to literally create a _new_ type for | 
|  | 285 | type-checking. | 
|  | 286 |  | 
|  | 287 | (d) New types which are identical to standard C99 types, in certain | 
|  | 288 | exceptional circumstances. | 
|  | 289 |  | 
|  | 290 | Although it would only take a short amount of time for the eyes and | 
|  | 291 | brain to become accustomed to the standard types like 'uint32_t', | 
|  | 292 | some people object to their use anyway. | 
|  | 293 |  | 
|  | 294 | Therefore, the Linux-specific 'u8/u16/u32/u64' types and their | 
|  | 295 | signed equivalents which are identical to standard types are | 
|  | 296 | permitted -- although they are not mandatory in new code of your | 
|  | 297 | own. | 
|  | 298 |  | 
|  | 299 | When editing existing code which already uses one or the other set | 
|  | 300 | of types, you should conform to the existing choices in that code. | 
|  | 301 |  | 
|  | 302 | (e) Types safe for use in userspace. | 
|  | 303 |  | 
|  | 304 | In certain structures which are visible to userspace, we cannot | 
|  | 305 | require C99 types and cannot use the 'u32' form above. Thus, we | 
|  | 306 | use __u32 and similar types in all structures which are shared | 
|  | 307 | with userspace. | 
|  | 308 |  | 
|  | 309 | Maybe there are other cases too, but the rule should basically be to NEVER | 
|  | 310 | EVER use a typedef unless you can clearly match one of those rules. | 
|  | 311 |  | 
|  | 312 | In general, a pointer, or a struct that has elements that can reasonably | 
|  | 313 | be directly accessed should _never_ be a typedef. | 
|  | 314 |  | 
|  | 315 |  | 
|  | 316 | Chapter 6: Functions | 
| Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 317 |  | 
|  | 318 | Functions should be short and sweet, and do just one thing.  They should | 
|  | 319 | fit on one or two screenfuls of text (the ISO/ANSI screen size is 80x24, | 
|  | 320 | as we all know), and do one thing and do that well. | 
|  | 321 |  | 
|  | 322 | The maximum length of a function is inversely proportional to the | 
|  | 323 | complexity and indentation level of that function.  So, if you have a | 
|  | 324 | conceptually simple function that is just one long (but simple) | 
|  | 325 | case-statement, where you have to do lots of small things for a lot of | 
|  | 326 | different cases, it's OK to have a longer function. | 
|  | 327 |  | 
|  | 328 | However, if you have a complex function, and you suspect that a | 
|  | 329 | less-than-gifted first-year high-school student might not even | 
|  | 330 | understand what the function is all about, you should adhere to the | 
|  | 331 | maximum limits all the more closely.  Use helper functions with | 
|  | 332 | descriptive names (you can ask the compiler to in-line them if you think | 
|  | 333 | it's performance-critical, and it will probably do a better job of it | 
|  | 334 | than you would have done). | 
|  | 335 |  | 
|  | 336 | Another measure of the function is the number of local variables.  They | 
|  | 337 | shouldn't exceed 5-10, or you're doing something wrong.  Re-think the | 
|  | 338 | function, and split it into smaller pieces.  A human brain can | 
|  | 339 | generally easily keep track of about 7 different things, anything more | 
|  | 340 | and it gets confused.  You know you're brilliant, but maybe you'd like | 
|  | 341 | to understand what you did 2 weeks from now. | 
|  | 342 |  | 
| Randy Dunlap | b3fc994 | 2006-12-10 02:18:56 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 343 | In source files, separate functions with one blank line.  If the function is | 
|  | 344 | exported, the EXPORT* macro for it should follow immediately after the closing | 
|  | 345 | function brace line.  E.g.: | 
|  | 346 |  | 
|  | 347 | int system_is_up(void) | 
|  | 348 | { | 
|  | 349 | return system_state == SYSTEM_RUNNING; | 
|  | 350 | } | 
|  | 351 | EXPORT_SYMBOL(system_is_up); | 
|  | 352 |  | 
|  | 353 | In function prototypes, include parameter names with their data types. | 
|  | 354 | Although this is not required by the C language, it is preferred in Linux | 
|  | 355 | because it is a simple way to add valuable information for the reader. | 
|  | 356 |  | 
| Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 357 |  | 
| Randy Dunlap | 226a6b8 | 2006-06-23 02:05:58 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 358 | Chapter 7: Centralized exiting of functions | 
| Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 359 |  | 
|  | 360 | Albeit deprecated by some people, the equivalent of the goto statement is | 
|  | 361 | used frequently by compilers in form of the unconditional jump instruction. | 
|  | 362 |  | 
|  | 363 | The goto statement comes in handy when a function exits from multiple | 
|  | 364 | locations and some common work such as cleanup has to be done. | 
|  | 365 |  | 
|  | 366 | The rationale is: | 
|  | 367 |  | 
|  | 368 | - unconditional statements are easier to understand and follow | 
|  | 369 | - nesting is reduced | 
|  | 370 | - errors by not updating individual exit points when making | 
|  | 371 | modifications are prevented | 
|  | 372 | - saves the compiler work to optimize redundant code away ;) | 
|  | 373 |  | 
| Jesper Juhl | dc3d28d | 2006-01-09 20:53:51 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 374 | int fun(int a) | 
| Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 375 | { | 
|  | 376 | int result = 0; | 
|  | 377 | char *buffer = kmalloc(SIZE); | 
|  | 378 |  | 
|  | 379 | if (buffer == NULL) | 
|  | 380 | return -ENOMEM; | 
|  | 381 |  | 
|  | 382 | if (condition1) { | 
|  | 383 | while (loop1) { | 
|  | 384 | ... | 
|  | 385 | } | 
|  | 386 | result = 1; | 
|  | 387 | goto out; | 
|  | 388 | } | 
|  | 389 | ... | 
|  | 390 | out: | 
|  | 391 | kfree(buffer); | 
|  | 392 | return result; | 
|  | 393 | } | 
|  | 394 |  | 
| Randy Dunlap | 226a6b8 | 2006-06-23 02:05:58 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 395 | Chapter 8: Commenting | 
| Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 396 |  | 
|  | 397 | Comments are good, but there is also a danger of over-commenting.  NEVER | 
|  | 398 | try to explain HOW your code works in a comment: it's much better to | 
|  | 399 | write the code so that the _working_ is obvious, and it's a waste of | 
|  | 400 | time to explain badly written code. | 
|  | 401 |  | 
|  | 402 | Generally, you want your comments to tell WHAT your code does, not HOW. | 
|  | 403 | Also, try to avoid putting comments inside a function body: if the | 
|  | 404 | function is so complex that you need to separately comment parts of it, | 
| Randy Dunlap | b3fc994 | 2006-12-10 02:18:56 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 405 | you should probably go back to chapter 6 for a while.  You can make | 
| Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 406 | small comments to note or warn about something particularly clever (or | 
|  | 407 | ugly), but try to avoid excess.  Instead, put the comments at the head | 
|  | 408 | of the function, telling people what it does, and possibly WHY it does | 
|  | 409 | it. | 
|  | 410 |  | 
| Randy Dunlap | b3fc994 | 2006-12-10 02:18:56 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 411 | When commenting the kernel API functions, please use the kernel-doc format. | 
| Pekka J Enberg | e776eba | 2005-09-10 00:26:44 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 412 | See the files Documentation/kernel-doc-nano-HOWTO.txt and scripts/kernel-doc | 
|  | 413 | for details. | 
| Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 414 |  | 
| Randy Dunlap | b3fc994 | 2006-12-10 02:18:56 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 415 | Linux style for comments is the C89 "/* ... */" style. | 
|  | 416 | Don't use C99-style "// ..." comments. | 
|  | 417 |  | 
|  | 418 | The preferred style for long (multi-line) comments is: | 
|  | 419 |  | 
|  | 420 | /* | 
|  | 421 | * This is the preferred style for multi-line | 
|  | 422 | * comments in the Linux kernel source code. | 
|  | 423 | * Please use it consistently. | 
|  | 424 | * | 
|  | 425 | * Description:  A column of asterisks on the left side, | 
|  | 426 | * with beginning and ending almost-blank lines. | 
|  | 427 | */ | 
|  | 428 |  | 
|  | 429 | It's also important to comment data, whether they are basic types or derived | 
|  | 430 | types.  To this end, use just one data declaration per line (no commas for | 
|  | 431 | multiple data declarations).  This leaves you room for a small comment on each | 
|  | 432 | item, explaining its use. | 
|  | 433 |  | 
|  | 434 |  | 
| Randy Dunlap | 226a6b8 | 2006-06-23 02:05:58 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 435 | Chapter 9: You've made a mess of it | 
| Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 436 |  | 
|  | 437 | That's OK, we all do.  You've probably been told by your long-time Unix | 
|  | 438 | user helper that "GNU emacs" automatically formats the C sources for | 
|  | 439 | you, and you've noticed that yes, it does do that, but the defaults it | 
|  | 440 | uses are less than desirable (in fact, they are worse than random | 
|  | 441 | typing - an infinite number of monkeys typing into GNU emacs would never | 
|  | 442 | make a good program). | 
|  | 443 |  | 
|  | 444 | So, you can either get rid of GNU emacs, or change it to use saner | 
|  | 445 | values.  To do the latter, you can stick the following in your .emacs file: | 
|  | 446 |  | 
|  | 447 | (defun linux-c-mode () | 
|  | 448 | "C mode with adjusted defaults for use with the Linux kernel." | 
|  | 449 | (interactive) | 
|  | 450 | (c-mode) | 
|  | 451 | (c-set-style "K&R") | 
|  | 452 | (setq tab-width 8) | 
|  | 453 | (setq indent-tabs-mode t) | 
|  | 454 | (setq c-basic-offset 8)) | 
|  | 455 |  | 
|  | 456 | This will define the M-x linux-c-mode command.  When hacking on a | 
|  | 457 | module, if you put the string -*- linux-c -*- somewhere on the first | 
|  | 458 | two lines, this mode will be automatically invoked. Also, you may want | 
|  | 459 | to add | 
|  | 460 |  | 
|  | 461 | (setq auto-mode-alist (cons '("/usr/src/linux.*/.*\\.[ch]$" . linux-c-mode) | 
|  | 462 | auto-mode-alist)) | 
|  | 463 |  | 
|  | 464 | to your .emacs file if you want to have linux-c-mode switched on | 
|  | 465 | automagically when you edit source files under /usr/src/linux. | 
|  | 466 |  | 
|  | 467 | But even if you fail in getting emacs to do sane formatting, not | 
|  | 468 | everything is lost: use "indent". | 
|  | 469 |  | 
|  | 470 | Now, again, GNU indent has the same brain-dead settings that GNU emacs | 
|  | 471 | has, which is why you need to give it a few command line options. | 
|  | 472 | However, that's not too bad, because even the makers of GNU indent | 
|  | 473 | recognize the authority of K&R (the GNU people aren't evil, they are | 
|  | 474 | just severely misguided in this matter), so you just give indent the | 
|  | 475 | options "-kr -i8" (stands for "K&R, 8 character indents"), or use | 
|  | 476 | "scripts/Lindent", which indents in the latest style. | 
|  | 477 |  | 
|  | 478 | "indent" has a lot of options, and especially when it comes to comment | 
|  | 479 | re-formatting you may want to take a look at the man page.  But | 
|  | 480 | remember: "indent" is not a fix for bad programming. | 
|  | 481 |  | 
|  | 482 |  | 
| Randy Dunlap | 226a6b8 | 2006-06-23 02:05:58 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 483 | Chapter 10: Configuration-files | 
| Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 484 |  | 
|  | 485 | For configuration options (arch/xxx/Kconfig, and all the Kconfig files), | 
|  | 486 | somewhat different indentation is used. | 
|  | 487 |  | 
|  | 488 | Help text is indented with 2 spaces. | 
|  | 489 |  | 
|  | 490 | if CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL | 
|  | 491 | tristate CONFIG_BOOM | 
|  | 492 | default n | 
|  | 493 | help | 
|  | 494 | Apply nitroglycerine inside the keyboard (DANGEROUS) | 
|  | 495 | bool CONFIG_CHEER | 
|  | 496 | depends on CONFIG_BOOM | 
|  | 497 | default y | 
|  | 498 | help | 
|  | 499 | Output nice messages when you explode | 
|  | 500 | endif | 
|  | 501 |  | 
|  | 502 | Generally, CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL should surround all options not considered | 
|  | 503 | stable. All options that are known to trash data (experimental write- | 
|  | 504 | support for file-systems, for instance) should be denoted (DANGEROUS), other | 
|  | 505 | experimental options should be denoted (EXPERIMENTAL). | 
|  | 506 |  | 
|  | 507 |  | 
| Randy Dunlap | 226a6b8 | 2006-06-23 02:05:58 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 508 | Chapter 11: Data structures | 
| Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 509 |  | 
|  | 510 | Data structures that have visibility outside the single-threaded | 
|  | 511 | environment they are created and destroyed in should always have | 
|  | 512 | reference counts.  In the kernel, garbage collection doesn't exist (and | 
|  | 513 | outside the kernel garbage collection is slow and inefficient), which | 
|  | 514 | means that you absolutely _have_ to reference count all your uses. | 
|  | 515 |  | 
|  | 516 | Reference counting means that you can avoid locking, and allows multiple | 
|  | 517 | users to have access to the data structure in parallel - and not having | 
|  | 518 | to worry about the structure suddenly going away from under them just | 
|  | 519 | because they slept or did something else for a while. | 
|  | 520 |  | 
|  | 521 | Note that locking is _not_ a replacement for reference counting. | 
|  | 522 | Locking is used to keep data structures coherent, while reference | 
|  | 523 | counting is a memory management technique.  Usually both are needed, and | 
|  | 524 | they are not to be confused with each other. | 
|  | 525 |  | 
|  | 526 | Many data structures can indeed have two levels of reference counting, | 
|  | 527 | when there are users of different "classes".  The subclass count counts | 
|  | 528 | the number of subclass users, and decrements the global count just once | 
|  | 529 | when the subclass count goes to zero. | 
|  | 530 |  | 
|  | 531 | Examples of this kind of "multi-level-reference-counting" can be found in | 
|  | 532 | memory management ("struct mm_struct": mm_users and mm_count), and in | 
|  | 533 | filesystem code ("struct super_block": s_count and s_active). | 
|  | 534 |  | 
|  | 535 | Remember: if another thread can find your data structure, and you don't | 
|  | 536 | have a reference count on it, you almost certainly have a bug. | 
|  | 537 |  | 
|  | 538 |  | 
| Randy Dunlap | 226a6b8 | 2006-06-23 02:05:58 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 539 | Chapter 12: Macros, Enums and RTL | 
| Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 540 |  | 
|  | 541 | Names of macros defining constants and labels in enums are capitalized. | 
|  | 542 |  | 
|  | 543 | #define CONSTANT 0x12345 | 
|  | 544 |  | 
|  | 545 | Enums are preferred when defining several related constants. | 
|  | 546 |  | 
|  | 547 | CAPITALIZED macro names are appreciated but macros resembling functions | 
|  | 548 | may be named in lower case. | 
|  | 549 |  | 
|  | 550 | Generally, inline functions are preferable to macros resembling functions. | 
|  | 551 |  | 
|  | 552 | Macros with multiple statements should be enclosed in a do - while block: | 
|  | 553 |  | 
|  | 554 | #define macrofun(a, b, c) 			\ | 
|  | 555 | do {					\ | 
|  | 556 | if (a == 5)			\ | 
|  | 557 | do_this(b, c);		\ | 
|  | 558 | } while (0) | 
|  | 559 |  | 
|  | 560 | Things to avoid when using macros: | 
|  | 561 |  | 
|  | 562 | 1) macros that affect control flow: | 
|  | 563 |  | 
|  | 564 | #define FOO(x)					\ | 
|  | 565 | do {					\ | 
|  | 566 | if (blah(x) < 0)		\ | 
|  | 567 | return -EBUGGERED;	\ | 
|  | 568 | } while(0) | 
|  | 569 |  | 
|  | 570 | is a _very_ bad idea.  It looks like a function call but exits the "calling" | 
|  | 571 | function; don't break the internal parsers of those who will read the code. | 
|  | 572 |  | 
|  | 573 | 2) macros that depend on having a local variable with a magic name: | 
|  | 574 |  | 
|  | 575 | #define FOO(val) bar(index, val) | 
|  | 576 |  | 
|  | 577 | might look like a good thing, but it's confusing as hell when one reads the | 
|  | 578 | code and it's prone to breakage from seemingly innocent changes. | 
|  | 579 |  | 
|  | 580 | 3) macros with arguments that are used as l-values: FOO(x) = y; will | 
|  | 581 | bite you if somebody e.g. turns FOO into an inline function. | 
|  | 582 |  | 
|  | 583 | 4) forgetting about precedence: macros defining constants using expressions | 
|  | 584 | must enclose the expression in parentheses. Beware of similar issues with | 
|  | 585 | macros using parameters. | 
|  | 586 |  | 
|  | 587 | #define CONSTANT 0x4000 | 
|  | 588 | #define CONSTEXP (CONSTANT | 3) | 
|  | 589 |  | 
|  | 590 | The cpp manual deals with macros exhaustively. The gcc internals manual also | 
|  | 591 | covers RTL which is used frequently with assembly language in the kernel. | 
|  | 592 |  | 
|  | 593 |  | 
| Randy Dunlap | 226a6b8 | 2006-06-23 02:05:58 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 594 | Chapter 13: Printing kernel messages | 
| Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 595 |  | 
|  | 596 | Kernel developers like to be seen as literate. Do mind the spelling | 
|  | 597 | of kernel messages to make a good impression. Do not use crippled | 
|  | 598 | words like "dont" and use "do not" or "don't" instead. | 
|  | 599 |  | 
|  | 600 | Kernel messages do not have to be terminated with a period. | 
|  | 601 |  | 
|  | 602 | Printing numbers in parentheses (%d) adds no value and should be avoided. | 
|  | 603 |  | 
|  | 604 |  | 
| Randy Dunlap | 226a6b8 | 2006-06-23 02:05:58 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 605 | Chapter 14: Allocating memory | 
| Pekka J Enberg | af4e5a2 | 2005-09-16 19:28:11 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 606 |  | 
|  | 607 | The kernel provides the following general purpose memory allocators: | 
|  | 608 | kmalloc(), kzalloc(), kcalloc(), and vmalloc().  Please refer to the API | 
|  | 609 | documentation for further information about them. | 
|  | 610 |  | 
|  | 611 | The preferred form for passing a size of a struct is the following: | 
|  | 612 |  | 
|  | 613 | p = kmalloc(sizeof(*p), ...); | 
|  | 614 |  | 
|  | 615 | The alternative form where struct name is spelled out hurts readability and | 
|  | 616 | introduces an opportunity for a bug when the pointer variable type is changed | 
|  | 617 | but the corresponding sizeof that is passed to a memory allocator is not. | 
|  | 618 |  | 
|  | 619 | Casting the return value which is a void pointer is redundant. The conversion | 
|  | 620 | from void pointer to any other pointer type is guaranteed by the C programming | 
|  | 621 | language. | 
|  | 622 |  | 
|  | 623 |  | 
| Randy Dunlap | 226a6b8 | 2006-06-23 02:05:58 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 624 | Chapter 15: The inline disease | 
| Arjan van de Ven | a771f2b | 2006-01-08 01:05:04 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 625 |  | 
|  | 626 | There appears to be a common misperception that gcc has a magic "make me | 
|  | 627 | faster" speedup option called "inline". While the use of inlines can be | 
|  | 628 | appropriate (for example as a means of replacing macros, see Chapter 11), it | 
|  | 629 | very often is not. Abundant use of the inline keyword leads to a much bigger | 
|  | 630 | kernel, which in turn slows the system as a whole down, due to a bigger | 
|  | 631 | icache footprint for the CPU and simply because there is less memory | 
|  | 632 | available for the pagecache. Just think about it; a pagecache miss causes a | 
|  | 633 | disk seek, which easily takes 5 miliseconds. There are a LOT of cpu cycles | 
|  | 634 | that can go into these 5 miliseconds. | 
|  | 635 |  | 
|  | 636 | A reasonable rule of thumb is to not put inline at functions that have more | 
|  | 637 | than 3 lines of code in them. An exception to this rule are the cases where | 
|  | 638 | a parameter is known to be a compiletime constant, and as a result of this | 
|  | 639 | constantness you *know* the compiler will be able to optimize most of your | 
|  | 640 | function away at compile time. For a good example of this later case, see | 
|  | 641 | the kmalloc() inline function. | 
|  | 642 |  | 
|  | 643 | Often people argue that adding inline to functions that are static and used | 
|  | 644 | only once is always a win since there is no space tradeoff. While this is | 
|  | 645 | technically correct, gcc is capable of inlining these automatically without | 
|  | 646 | help, and the maintenance issue of removing the inline when a second user | 
|  | 647 | appears outweighs the potential value of the hint that tells gcc to do | 
|  | 648 | something it would have done anyway. | 
|  | 649 |  | 
|  | 650 |  | 
| Alan Stern | c16a02d | 2006-09-29 02:01:21 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 651 | Chapter 16: Function return values and names | 
|  | 652 |  | 
|  | 653 | Functions can return values of many different kinds, and one of the | 
|  | 654 | most common is a value indicating whether the function succeeded or | 
|  | 655 | failed.  Such a value can be represented as an error-code integer | 
|  | 656 | (-Exxx = failure, 0 = success) or a "succeeded" boolean (0 = failure, | 
|  | 657 | non-zero = success). | 
|  | 658 |  | 
|  | 659 | Mixing up these two sorts of representations is a fertile source of | 
|  | 660 | difficult-to-find bugs.  If the C language included a strong distinction | 
|  | 661 | between integers and booleans then the compiler would find these mistakes | 
|  | 662 | for us... but it doesn't.  To help prevent such bugs, always follow this | 
|  | 663 | convention: | 
|  | 664 |  | 
|  | 665 | If the name of a function is an action or an imperative command, | 
|  | 666 | the function should return an error-code integer.  If the name | 
|  | 667 | is a predicate, the function should return a "succeeded" boolean. | 
|  | 668 |  | 
|  | 669 | For example, "add work" is a command, and the add_work() function returns 0 | 
|  | 670 | for success or -EBUSY for failure.  In the same way, "PCI device present" is | 
|  | 671 | a predicate, and the pci_dev_present() function returns 1 if it succeeds in | 
|  | 672 | finding a matching device or 0 if it doesn't. | 
|  | 673 |  | 
|  | 674 | All EXPORTed functions must respect this convention, and so should all | 
|  | 675 | public functions.  Private (static) functions need not, but it is | 
|  | 676 | recommended that they do. | 
|  | 677 |  | 
|  | 678 | Functions whose return value is the actual result of a computation, rather | 
|  | 679 | than an indication of whether the computation succeeded, are not subject to | 
|  | 680 | this rule.  Generally they indicate failure by returning some out-of-range | 
|  | 681 | result.  Typical examples would be functions that return pointers; they use | 
|  | 682 | NULL or the ERR_PTR mechanism to report failure. | 
|  | 683 |  | 
|  | 684 |  | 
| Robert P. J. Day | 58637ec | 2006-12-22 01:09:11 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 685 | Chapter 17:  Don't re-invent the kernel macros | 
|  | 686 |  | 
|  | 687 | The header file include/linux/kernel.h contains a number of macros that | 
|  | 688 | you should use, rather than explicitly coding some variant of them yourself. | 
|  | 689 | For example, if you need to calculate the length of an array, take advantage | 
|  | 690 | of the macro | 
|  | 691 |  | 
|  | 692 | #define ARRAY_SIZE(x) (sizeof(x) / sizeof((x)[0])) | 
|  | 693 |  | 
|  | 694 | Similarly, if you need to calculate the size of some structure member, use | 
|  | 695 |  | 
|  | 696 | #define FIELD_SIZEOF(t, f) (sizeof(((t*)0)->f)) | 
|  | 697 |  | 
|  | 698 | There are also min() and max() macros that do strict type checking if you | 
|  | 699 | need them.  Feel free to peruse that header file to see what else is already | 
|  | 700 | defined that you shouldn't reproduce in your code. | 
|  | 701 |  | 
|  | 702 |  | 
| Arjan van de Ven | a771f2b | 2006-01-08 01:05:04 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 703 |  | 
| Randy Dunlap | 226a6b8 | 2006-06-23 02:05:58 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 704 | Appendix I: References | 
| Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 705 |  | 
|  | 706 | The C Programming Language, Second Edition | 
|  | 707 | by Brian W. Kernighan and Dennis M. Ritchie. | 
|  | 708 | Prentice Hall, Inc., 1988. | 
|  | 709 | ISBN 0-13-110362-8 (paperback), 0-13-110370-9 (hardback). | 
|  | 710 | URL: http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/cbook/ | 
|  | 711 |  | 
|  | 712 | The Practice of Programming | 
|  | 713 | by Brian W. Kernighan and Rob Pike. | 
|  | 714 | Addison-Wesley, Inc., 1999. | 
|  | 715 | ISBN 0-201-61586-X. | 
|  | 716 | URL: http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/tpop/ | 
|  | 717 |  | 
|  | 718 | GNU manuals - where in compliance with K&R and this text - for cpp, gcc, | 
| Xose Vazquez Perez | 5b0ed2c | 2006-01-08 01:02:49 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 719 | gcc internals and indent, all available from http://www.gnu.org/manual/ | 
| Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 720 |  | 
|  | 721 | WG14 is the international standardization working group for the programming | 
| Xose Vazquez Perez | 5b0ed2c | 2006-01-08 01:02:49 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 722 | language C, URL: http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG14/ | 
|  | 723 |  | 
|  | 724 | Kernel CodingStyle, by greg@kroah.com at OLS 2002: | 
|  | 725 | http://www.kroah.com/linux/talks/ols_2002_kernel_codingstyle_talk/html/ | 
| Linus Torvalds | 1da177e | 2005-04-16 15:20:36 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 726 |  | 
|  | 727 | -- | 
| Randy Dunlap | b3fc994 | 2006-12-10 02:18:56 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 728 | Last updated on 2006-December-06. |