Wed, May 17, 2017 at 02:39:05PM CEST, j...@mojatatu.com wrote: >On 17-05-17 08:25 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >> Wed, May 17, 2017 at 02:18:00PM CEST, j...@mojatatu.com wrote: >> > On 17-05-17 05:07 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >> > > From: Jiri Pirko <j...@mellanox.com> >> > > >> > > Introduce struct tcf_chain object and set of helpers around it. Wraps up >> > > insertion, deletion and search in the filter chain. >> > > >> > > Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <j...@mellanox.com> >> > > --- >> > >> > [..] >> > > + >> > > +static void >> > > +tcf_chain_filter_chain_ptr_set(struct tcf_chain *chain, >> > > + struct tcf_proto __rcu **p_filter_chain) >> > > + >> > >> > What are the rules for this? Common coding style is: >> > static void tcf_chain_filter_chain_ptr_set(struct tcf_chain *chain, >> > struct tcf_proto .. >> >> When this would not fit 80 cols (this case), you need to wrap the >> text in front of the function name. That is exacly what I did. >> > >That i understand. >The question is: what does scripture dictate on conflict? >Should a function signature always follow coding style and >allow for exceeding 80 chars or the 80 chars rules trumps?
Definitelly 80 chars rules trumps here.
