On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 at 17:53, Stephen Hemminger <step...@networkplumber.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 17:51:13 +0200 > Tudor Cornea <tudor.cor...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > +#ifdef RTE_KNI_PREEMPT_DEFAULT > > +module_param(min_scheduling_interval, long, 0644); > > +MODULE_PARM_DESC(min_scheduling_interval, > > +"Kni thread min scheduling interval (default=100 microseconds):\n" > > +"\t\t" > > +); > > Why the non-standard newline's and tab's? > Please try to make KNI look like other kernel code. > Hi Stephen, I tried to base the description of the new parameters on an existing parameter implemented for the rte_kni module - carrier. module_param(carrier, charp, 0644); MODULE_PARM_DESC(carrier, "Default carrier state for KNI interface (default=off):\n" "\t\toff Interfaces will be created with carrier state set to off.\n" "\t\ton Interfaces will be created with carrier state set to on.\n" "\t\t" ); I thought about keeping the compatibility in terms of coding style with the existing Kni module parameters. Upon browsing the Linux tree, I realise it might not be standard ( checkpatch.pl , interestingly didn't seem to complain about the patch) I also realise now, that I missed two tabs at the beginning of the params description. Should I add the missing tabs, so that the new parameters that I intend to add through this patch are similar in style to the existing ones, or should I remove the newlines and tabs altogether, when specifying the description for min_scheduling_interval and max_scheduling_interval ? Thanks, Tudor
