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 | |
| 38 | Don't put multiple statements on a single line unless you have |
| 39 | something to hide: |
| 40 | |
| 41 | if (condition) do_this; |
| 42 | do_something_everytime; |
| 43 | |
| 44 | Outside of comments, documentation and except in Kconfig, spaces are never |
| 45 | used for indentation, and the above example is deliberately broken. |
| 46 | |
| 47 | Get a decent editor and don't leave whitespace at the end of lines. |
| 48 | |
| 49 | |
| 50 | Chapter 2: Breaking long lines and strings |
| 51 | |
| 52 | Coding style is all about readability and maintainability using commonly |
| 53 | available tools. |
| 54 | |
| 55 | The limit on the length of lines is 80 columns and this is a hard limit. |
| 56 | |
| 57 | Statements longer than 80 columns will be broken into sensible chunks. |
| 58 | Descendants are always substantially shorter than the parent and are placed |
| 59 | substantially to the right. The same applies to function headers with a long |
| 60 | argument list. Long strings are as well broken into shorter strings. |
| 61 | |
| 62 | void fun(int a, int b, int c) |
| 63 | { |
| 64 | if (condition) |
| 65 | printk(KERN_WARNING "Warning this is a long printk with " |
| 66 | "3 parameters a: %u b: %u " |
| 67 | "c: %u \n", a, b, c); |
| 68 | else |
| 69 | next_statement; |
| 70 | } |
| 71 | |
| 72 | Chapter 3: Placing Braces |
| 73 | |
| 74 | The other issue that always comes up in C styling is the placement of |
| 75 | braces. Unlike the indent size, there are few technical reasons to |
| 76 | choose one placement strategy over the other, but the preferred way, as |
| 77 | shown to us by the prophets Kernighan and Ritchie, is to put the opening |
| 78 | brace last on the line, and put the closing brace first, thusly: |
| 79 | |
| 80 | if (x is true) { |
| 81 | we do y |
| 82 | } |
| 83 | |
| 84 | However, there is one special case, namely functions: they have the |
| 85 | opening brace at the beginning of the next line, thus: |
| 86 | |
| 87 | int function(int x) |
| 88 | { |
| 89 | body of function |
| 90 | } |
| 91 | |
| 92 | Heretic people all over the world have claimed that this inconsistency |
| 93 | is ... well ... inconsistent, but all right-thinking people know that |
| 94 | (a) K&R are _right_ and (b) K&R are right. Besides, functions are |
| 95 | special anyway (you can't nest them in C). |
| 96 | |
| 97 | Note that the closing brace is empty on a line of its own, _except_ in |
| 98 | the cases where it is followed by a continuation of the same statement, |
| 99 | ie a "while" in a do-statement or an "else" in an if-statement, like |
| 100 | this: |
| 101 | |
| 102 | do { |
| 103 | body of do-loop |
| 104 | } while (condition); |
| 105 | |
| 106 | and |
| 107 | |
| 108 | if (x == y) { |
| 109 | .. |
| 110 | } else if (x > y) { |
| 111 | ... |
| 112 | } else { |
| 113 | .... |
| 114 | } |
| 115 | |
| 116 | Rationale: K&R. |
| 117 | |
| 118 | Also, note that this brace-placement also minimizes the number of empty |
| 119 | (or almost empty) lines, without any loss of readability. Thus, as the |
| 120 | supply of new-lines on your screen is not a renewable resource (think |
| 121 | 25-line terminal screens here), you have more empty lines to put |
| 122 | comments on. |
| 123 | |
| 124 | |
| 125 | Chapter 4: Naming |
| 126 | |
| 127 | C is a Spartan language, and so should your naming be. Unlike Modula-2 |
| 128 | and Pascal programmers, C programmers do not use cute names like |
| 129 | ThisVariableIsATemporaryCounter. A C programmer would call that |
| 130 | variable "tmp", which is much easier to write, and not the least more |
| 131 | difficult to understand. |
| 132 | |
| 133 | HOWEVER, while mixed-case names are frowned upon, descriptive names for |
| 134 | global variables are a must. To call a global function "foo" is a |
| 135 | shooting offense. |
| 136 | |
| 137 | GLOBAL variables (to be used only if you _really_ need them) need to |
| 138 | have descriptive names, as do global functions. If you have a function |
| 139 | that counts the number of active users, you should call that |
| 140 | "count_active_users()" or similar, you should _not_ call it "cntusr()". |
| 141 | |
| 142 | Encoding the type of a function into the name (so-called Hungarian |
| 143 | notation) is brain damaged - the compiler knows the types anyway and can |
| 144 | check those, and it only confuses the programmer. No wonder MicroSoft |
| 145 | makes buggy programs. |
| 146 | |
| 147 | LOCAL variable names should be short, and to the point. If you have |
| 148 | some random integer loop counter, it should probably be called "i". |
| 149 | Calling it "loop_counter" is non-productive, if there is no chance of it |
| 150 | being mis-understood. Similarly, "tmp" can be just about any type of |
| 151 | variable that is used to hold a temporary value. |
| 152 | |
| 153 | If you are afraid to mix up your local variable names, you have another |
| 154 | problem, which is called the function-growth-hormone-imbalance syndrome. |
| 155 | See next chapter. |
| 156 | |
| 157 | |
| 158 | Chapter 5: Functions |
| 159 | |
| 160 | Functions should be short and sweet, and do just one thing. They should |
| 161 | fit on one or two screenfuls of text (the ISO/ANSI screen size is 80x24, |
| 162 | as we all know), and do one thing and do that well. |
| 163 | |
| 164 | The maximum length of a function is inversely proportional to the |
| 165 | complexity and indentation level of that function. So, if you have a |
| 166 | conceptually simple function that is just one long (but simple) |
| 167 | case-statement, where you have to do lots of small things for a lot of |
| 168 | different cases, it's OK to have a longer function. |
| 169 | |
| 170 | However, if you have a complex function, and you suspect that a |
| 171 | less-than-gifted first-year high-school student might not even |
| 172 | understand what the function is all about, you should adhere to the |
| 173 | maximum limits all the more closely. Use helper functions with |
| 174 | descriptive names (you can ask the compiler to in-line them if you think |
| 175 | it's performance-critical, and it will probably do a better job of it |
| 176 | than you would have done). |
| 177 | |
| 178 | Another measure of the function is the number of local variables. They |
| 179 | shouldn't exceed 5-10, or you're doing something wrong. Re-think the |
| 180 | function, and split it into smaller pieces. A human brain can |
| 181 | generally easily keep track of about 7 different things, anything more |
| 182 | and it gets confused. You know you're brilliant, but maybe you'd like |
| 183 | to understand what you did 2 weeks from now. |
| 184 | |
| 185 | |
| 186 | Chapter 6: Centralized exiting of functions |
| 187 | |
| 188 | Albeit deprecated by some people, the equivalent of the goto statement is |
| 189 | used frequently by compilers in form of the unconditional jump instruction. |
| 190 | |
| 191 | The goto statement comes in handy when a function exits from multiple |
| 192 | locations and some common work such as cleanup has to be done. |
| 193 | |
| 194 | The rationale is: |
| 195 | |
| 196 | - unconditional statements are easier to understand and follow |
| 197 | - nesting is reduced |
| 198 | - errors by not updating individual exit points when making |
| 199 | modifications are prevented |
| 200 | - saves the compiler work to optimize redundant code away ;) |
| 201 | |
| 202 | int fun(int ) |
| 203 | { |
| 204 | int result = 0; |
| 205 | char *buffer = kmalloc(SIZE); |
| 206 | |
| 207 | if (buffer == NULL) |
| 208 | return -ENOMEM; |
| 209 | |
| 210 | if (condition1) { |
| 211 | while (loop1) { |
| 212 | ... |
| 213 | } |
| 214 | result = 1; |
| 215 | goto out; |
| 216 | } |
| 217 | ... |
| 218 | out: |
| 219 | kfree(buffer); |
| 220 | return result; |
| 221 | } |
| 222 | |
| 223 | Chapter 7: Commenting |
| 224 | |
| 225 | Comments are good, but there is also a danger of over-commenting. NEVER |
| 226 | try to explain HOW your code works in a comment: it's much better to |
| 227 | write the code so that the _working_ is obvious, and it's a waste of |
| 228 | time to explain badly written code. |
| 229 | |
| 230 | Generally, you want your comments to tell WHAT your code does, not HOW. |
| 231 | Also, try to avoid putting comments inside a function body: if the |
| 232 | function is so complex that you need to separately comment parts of it, |
| 233 | you should probably go back to chapter 5 for a while. You can make |
| 234 | small comments to note or warn about something particularly clever (or |
| 235 | ugly), but try to avoid excess. Instead, put the comments at the head |
| 236 | of the function, telling people what it does, and possibly WHY it does |
| 237 | it. |
| 238 | |
| 239 | |
| 240 | Chapter 8: You've made a mess of it |
| 241 | |
| 242 | That's OK, we all do. You've probably been told by your long-time Unix |
| 243 | user helper that "GNU emacs" automatically formats the C sources for |
| 244 | you, and you've noticed that yes, it does do that, but the defaults it |
| 245 | uses are less than desirable (in fact, they are worse than random |
| 246 | typing - an infinite number of monkeys typing into GNU emacs would never |
| 247 | make a good program). |
| 248 | |
| 249 | So, you can either get rid of GNU emacs, or change it to use saner |
| 250 | values. To do the latter, you can stick the following in your .emacs file: |
| 251 | |
| 252 | (defun linux-c-mode () |
| 253 | "C mode with adjusted defaults for use with the Linux kernel." |
| 254 | (interactive) |
| 255 | (c-mode) |
| 256 | (c-set-style "K&R") |
| 257 | (setq tab-width 8) |
| 258 | (setq indent-tabs-mode t) |
| 259 | (setq c-basic-offset 8)) |
| 260 | |
| 261 | This will define the M-x linux-c-mode command. When hacking on a |
| 262 | module, if you put the string -*- linux-c -*- somewhere on the first |
| 263 | two lines, this mode will be automatically invoked. Also, you may want |
| 264 | to add |
| 265 | |
| 266 | (setq auto-mode-alist (cons '("/usr/src/linux.*/.*\\.[ch]$" . linux-c-mode) |
| 267 | auto-mode-alist)) |
| 268 | |
| 269 | to your .emacs file if you want to have linux-c-mode switched on |
| 270 | automagically when you edit source files under /usr/src/linux. |
| 271 | |
| 272 | But even if you fail in getting emacs to do sane formatting, not |
| 273 | everything is lost: use "indent". |
| 274 | |
| 275 | Now, again, GNU indent has the same brain-dead settings that GNU emacs |
| 276 | has, which is why you need to give it a few command line options. |
| 277 | However, that's not too bad, because even the makers of GNU indent |
| 278 | recognize the authority of K&R (the GNU people aren't evil, they are |
| 279 | just severely misguided in this matter), so you just give indent the |
| 280 | options "-kr -i8" (stands for "K&R, 8 character indents"), or use |
| 281 | "scripts/Lindent", which indents in the latest style. |
| 282 | |
| 283 | "indent" has a lot of options, and especially when it comes to comment |
| 284 | re-formatting you may want to take a look at the man page. But |
| 285 | remember: "indent" is not a fix for bad programming. |
| 286 | |
| 287 | |
| 288 | Chapter 9: Configuration-files |
| 289 | |
| 290 | For configuration options (arch/xxx/Kconfig, and all the Kconfig files), |
| 291 | somewhat different indentation is used. |
| 292 | |
| 293 | Help text is indented with 2 spaces. |
| 294 | |
| 295 | if CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL |
| 296 | tristate CONFIG_BOOM |
| 297 | default n |
| 298 | help |
| 299 | Apply nitroglycerine inside the keyboard (DANGEROUS) |
| 300 | bool CONFIG_CHEER |
| 301 | depends on CONFIG_BOOM |
| 302 | default y |
| 303 | help |
| 304 | Output nice messages when you explode |
| 305 | endif |
| 306 | |
| 307 | Generally, CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL should surround all options not considered |
| 308 | stable. All options that are known to trash data (experimental write- |
| 309 | support for file-systems, for instance) should be denoted (DANGEROUS), other |
| 310 | experimental options should be denoted (EXPERIMENTAL). |
| 311 | |
| 312 | |
| 313 | Chapter 10: Data structures |
| 314 | |
| 315 | Data structures that have visibility outside the single-threaded |
| 316 | environment they are created and destroyed in should always have |
| 317 | reference counts. In the kernel, garbage collection doesn't exist (and |
| 318 | outside the kernel garbage collection is slow and inefficient), which |
| 319 | means that you absolutely _have_ to reference count all your uses. |
| 320 | |
| 321 | Reference counting means that you can avoid locking, and allows multiple |
| 322 | users to have access to the data structure in parallel - and not having |
| 323 | to worry about the structure suddenly going away from under them just |
| 324 | because they slept or did something else for a while. |
| 325 | |
| 326 | Note that locking is _not_ a replacement for reference counting. |
| 327 | Locking is used to keep data structures coherent, while reference |
| 328 | counting is a memory management technique. Usually both are needed, and |
| 329 | they are not to be confused with each other. |
| 330 | |
| 331 | Many data structures can indeed have two levels of reference counting, |
| 332 | when there are users of different "classes". The subclass count counts |
| 333 | the number of subclass users, and decrements the global count just once |
| 334 | when the subclass count goes to zero. |
| 335 | |
| 336 | Examples of this kind of "multi-level-reference-counting" can be found in |
| 337 | memory management ("struct mm_struct": mm_users and mm_count), and in |
| 338 | filesystem code ("struct super_block": s_count and s_active). |
| 339 | |
| 340 | Remember: if another thread can find your data structure, and you don't |
| 341 | have a reference count on it, you almost certainly have a bug. |
| 342 | |
| 343 | |
| 344 | Chapter 11: Macros, Enums, Inline functions and RTL |
| 345 | |
| 346 | Names of macros defining constants and labels in enums are capitalized. |
| 347 | |
| 348 | #define CONSTANT 0x12345 |
| 349 | |
| 350 | Enums are preferred when defining several related constants. |
| 351 | |
| 352 | CAPITALIZED macro names are appreciated but macros resembling functions |
| 353 | may be named in lower case. |
| 354 | |
| 355 | Generally, inline functions are preferable to macros resembling functions. |
| 356 | |
| 357 | Macros with multiple statements should be enclosed in a do - while block: |
| 358 | |
| 359 | #define macrofun(a, b, c) \ |
| 360 | do { \ |
| 361 | if (a == 5) \ |
| 362 | do_this(b, c); \ |
| 363 | } while (0) |
| 364 | |
| 365 | Things to avoid when using macros: |
| 366 | |
| 367 | 1) macros that affect control flow: |
| 368 | |
| 369 | #define FOO(x) \ |
| 370 | do { \ |
| 371 | if (blah(x) < 0) \ |
| 372 | return -EBUGGERED; \ |
| 373 | } while(0) |
| 374 | |
| 375 | is a _very_ bad idea. It looks like a function call but exits the "calling" |
| 376 | function; don't break the internal parsers of those who will read the code. |
| 377 | |
| 378 | 2) macros that depend on having a local variable with a magic name: |
| 379 | |
| 380 | #define FOO(val) bar(index, val) |
| 381 | |
| 382 | might look like a good thing, but it's confusing as hell when one reads the |
| 383 | code and it's prone to breakage from seemingly innocent changes. |
| 384 | |
| 385 | 3) macros with arguments that are used as l-values: FOO(x) = y; will |
| 386 | bite you if somebody e.g. turns FOO into an inline function. |
| 387 | |
| 388 | 4) forgetting about precedence: macros defining constants using expressions |
| 389 | must enclose the expression in parentheses. Beware of similar issues with |
| 390 | macros using parameters. |
| 391 | |
| 392 | #define CONSTANT 0x4000 |
| 393 | #define CONSTEXP (CONSTANT | 3) |
| 394 | |
| 395 | The cpp manual deals with macros exhaustively. The gcc internals manual also |
| 396 | covers RTL which is used frequently with assembly language in the kernel. |
| 397 | |
| 398 | |
| 399 | Chapter 12: Printing kernel messages |
| 400 | |
| 401 | Kernel developers like to be seen as literate. Do mind the spelling |
| 402 | of kernel messages to make a good impression. Do not use crippled |
| 403 | words like "dont" and use "do not" or "don't" instead. |
| 404 | |
| 405 | Kernel messages do not have to be terminated with a period. |
| 406 | |
| 407 | Printing numbers in parentheses (%d) adds no value and should be avoided. |
| 408 | |
| 409 | |
| 410 | Chapter 13: References |
| 411 | |
| 412 | The C Programming Language, Second Edition |
| 413 | by Brian W. Kernighan and Dennis M. Ritchie. |
| 414 | Prentice Hall, Inc., 1988. |
| 415 | ISBN 0-13-110362-8 (paperback), 0-13-110370-9 (hardback). |
| 416 | URL: http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/cbook/ |
| 417 | |
| 418 | The Practice of Programming |
| 419 | by Brian W. Kernighan and Rob Pike. |
| 420 | Addison-Wesley, Inc., 1999. |
| 421 | ISBN 0-201-61586-X. |
| 422 | URL: http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/tpop/ |
| 423 | |
| 424 | GNU manuals - where in compliance with K&R and this text - for cpp, gcc, |
| 425 | gcc internals and indent, all available from http://www.gnu.org |
| 426 | |
| 427 | WG14 is the international standardization working group for the programming |
| 428 | language C, URL: http://std.dkuug.dk/JTC1/SC22/WG14/ |
| 429 | |
| 430 | -- |
| 431 | Last updated on 16 February 2004 by a community effort on LKML. |