123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390391392393394395396397398399400401402403404405406407408409410411412413414415416417418419420421422423424425426427428429430431432433434435436437438439440441442443444445446447448449450451452453454455456457458459460461462463464465466467468469470471472473474475476477478479480481482483484 |
- 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 a)
- {
- 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.
- When commenting the kernel API functions, please use the kerneldoc format.
- See the files Documentation/kernel-doc-nano-HOWTO.txt and scripts/kernel-doc
- for details.
- 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 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: Allocating memory
- The kernel provides the following general purpose memory allocators:
- kmalloc(), kzalloc(), kcalloc(), and vmalloc(). Please refer to the API
- documentation for further information about them.
- 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.
- Chapter 14: The inline disease
- 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
- appropriate (for example as a means of replacing macros, see Chapter 11), it
- 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
- disk seek, which easily takes 5 miliseconds. There are a LOT of cpu cycles
- that can go into these 5 miliseconds.
- 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.
- Chapter 15: 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/manual/
- WG14 is the international standardization working group for the programming
- 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/
- --
- Last updated on 30 December 2005 by a community effort on LKML.
|