diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/CodingStyle')
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/CodingStyle | 828 |
1 files changed, 828 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/CodingStyle b/Documentation/CodingStyle new file mode 100644 index 00000000..fa6e25b9 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/CodingStyle @@ -0,0 +1,828 @@ + + 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. + +The preferred way to ease multiple indentation levels in a switch statement is +to align the "switch" and its subordinate "case" labels in the same column +instead of "double-indenting" the "case" labels. E.g.: + + switch (suffix) { + case 'G': + case 'g': + mem <<= 30; + break; + case 'M': + case 'm': + mem <<= 20; + break; + case 'K': + case 'k': + mem <<= 10; + /* fall through */ + default: + break; + } + + +Don't put multiple statements on a single line unless you have +something to hide: + + if (condition) do_this; + do_something_everytime; + +Don't put multiple assignments on a single line either. Kernel coding style +is super simple. Avoid tricky expressions. + +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 strongly +preferred 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. The +only exception to this is where exceeding 80 columns significantly increases +readability and does not hide information. + +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 and Spaces + +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 + } + +This applies to all non-function statement blocks (if, switch, for, +while, do). E.g.: + + switch (action) { + case KOBJ_ADD: + return "add"; + case KOBJ_REMOVE: + return "remove"; + case KOBJ_CHANGE: + return "change"; + default: + return NULL; + } + +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. + +Do not unnecessarily use braces where a single statement will do. + +if (condition) + action(); + +and + +if (condition) + do_this(); +else + do_that(); + +This does not apply if one branch of a conditional statement is a single +statement. Use braces in both branches. + +if (condition) { + do_this(); + do_that(); +} else { + otherwise(); +} + + 3.1: Spaces + +Linux kernel style for use of spaces depends (mostly) on +function-versus-keyword usage. Use a space after (most) keywords. The +notable exceptions are sizeof, typeof, alignof, and __attribute__, which look +somewhat like functions (and are usually used with parentheses in Linux, +although they are not required in the language, as in: "sizeof info" after +"struct fileinfo info;" is declared). + +So use a space after these keywords: + if, switch, case, for, do, while +but not with sizeof, typeof, alignof, or __attribute__. E.g., + s = sizeof(struct file); + +Do not add spaces around (inside) parenthesized expressions. This example is +*bad*: + + s = sizeof( struct file ); + +When declaring pointer data or a function that returns a pointer type, the +preferred use of '*' is adjacent to the data name or function name and not +adjacent to the type name. Examples: + + char *linux_banner; + unsigned long long memparse(char *ptr, char **retptr); + char *match_strdup(substring_t *s); + +Use one space around (on each side of) most binary and ternary operators, +such as any of these: + + = + - < > * / % | & ^ <= >= == != ? : + +but no space after unary operators: + & * + - ~ ! sizeof typeof alignof __attribute__ defined + +no space before the postfix increment & decrement unary operators: + ++ -- + +no space after the prefix increment & decrement unary operators: + ++ -- + +and no space around the '.' and "->" structure member operators. + +Do not leave trailing whitespace at the ends of lines. Some editors with +"smart" indentation will insert whitespace at the beginning of new lines as +appropriate, so you can start typing the next line of code right away. +However, some such editors do not remove the whitespace if you end up not +putting a line of code there, such as if you leave a blank line. As a result, +you end up with lines containing trailing whitespace. + +Git will warn you about patches that introduce trailing whitespace, and can +optionally strip the trailing whitespace for you; however, if applying a series +of patches, this may make later patches in the series fail by changing their +context lines. + + + 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 chapter 6 (Functions). + + + Chapter 5: Typedefs + +Please don't use things like "vps_t". + +It's a _mistake_ to use typedef for structures and pointers. When you see a + + vps_t a; + +in the source, what does it mean? + +In contrast, if it says + + struct virtual_container *a; + +you can actually tell what "a" is. + +Lots of people think that typedefs "help readability". Not so. They are +useful only for: + + (a) totally opaque objects (where the typedef is actively used to _hide_ + what the object is). + + Example: "pte_t" etc. opaque objects that you can only access using + the proper accessor functions. + + NOTE! Opaqueness and "accessor functions" are not good in themselves. + The reason we have them for things like pte_t etc. is that there + really is absolutely _zero_ portably accessible information there. + + (b) Clear integer types, where the abstraction _helps_ avoid confusion + whether it is "int" or "long". + + u8/u16/u32 are perfectly fine typedefs, although they fit into + category (d) better than here. + + NOTE! Again - there needs to be a _reason_ for this. If something is + "unsigned long", then there's no reason to do + + typedef unsigned long myflags_t; + + but if there is a clear reason for why it under certain circumstances + might be an "unsigned int" and under other configurations might be + "unsigned long", then by all means go ahead and use a typedef. + + (c) when you use sparse to literally create a _new_ type for + type-checking. + + (d) New types which are identical to standard C99 types, in certain + exceptional circumstances. + + Although it would only take a short amount of time for the eyes and + brain to become accustomed to the standard types like 'uint32_t', + some people object to their use anyway. + + Therefore, the Linux-specific 'u8/u16/u32/u64' types and their + signed equivalents which are identical to standard types are + permitted -- although they are not mandatory in new code of your + own. + + When editing existing code which already uses one or the other set + of types, you should conform to the existing choices in that code. + + (e) Types safe for use in userspace. + + In certain structures which are visible to userspace, we cannot + require C99 types and cannot use the 'u32' form above. Thus, we + use __u32 and similar types in all structures which are shared + with userspace. + +Maybe there are other cases too, but the rule should basically be to NEVER +EVER use a typedef unless you can clearly match one of those rules. + +In general, a pointer, or a struct that has elements that can reasonably +be directly accessed should _never_ be a typedef. + + + Chapter 6: 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. + +In source files, separate functions with one blank line. If the function is +exported, the EXPORT* macro for it should follow immediately after the closing +function brace line. E.g.: + +int system_is_up(void) +{ + return system_state == SYSTEM_RUNNING; +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL(system_is_up); + +In function prototypes, include parameter names with their data types. +Although this is not required by the C language, it is preferred in Linux +because it is a simple way to add valuable information for the reader. + + + Chapter 7: 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 8: 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 6 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 kernel-doc format. +See the files Documentation/kernel-doc-nano-HOWTO.txt and scripts/kernel-doc +for details. + +Linux style for comments is the C89 "/* ... */" style. +Don't use C99-style "// ..." comments. + +The preferred style for long (multi-line) comments is: + + /* + * This is the preferred style for multi-line + * comments in the Linux kernel source code. + * Please use it consistently. + * + * Description: A column of asterisks on the left side, + * with beginning and ending almost-blank lines. + */ + +It's also important to comment data, whether they are basic types or derived +types. To this end, use just one data declaration per line (no commas for +multiple data declarations). This leaves you room for a small comment on each +item, explaining its use. + + + Chapter 9: 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 c-lineup-arglist-tabs-only (ignored) + "Line up argument lists by tabs, not spaces" + (let* ((anchor (c-langelem-pos c-syntactic-element)) + (column (c-langelem-2nd-pos c-syntactic-element)) + (offset (- (1+ column) anchor)) + (steps (floor offset c-basic-offset))) + (* (max steps 1) + c-basic-offset))) + +(add-hook 'c-mode-common-hook + (lambda () + ;; Add kernel style + (c-add-style + "linux-tabs-only" + '("linux" (c-offsets-alist + (arglist-cont-nonempty + c-lineup-gcc-asm-reg + c-lineup-arglist-tabs-only)))))) + +(add-hook 'c-mode-hook + (lambda () + (let ((filename (buffer-file-name))) + ;; Enable kernel mode for the appropriate files + (when (and filename + (string-match (expand-file-name "~/src/linux-trees") + filename)) + (setq indent-tabs-mode t) + (c-set-style "linux-tabs-only"))))) + +This will make emacs go better with the kernel coding style for C +files below ~/src/linux-trees. + +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 10: Kconfig configuration files + +For all of the Kconfig* configuration files throughout the source tree, +the indentation is somewhat different. Lines under a "config" definition +are indented with one tab, while help text is indented an additional two +spaces. Example: + +config AUDIT + bool "Auditing support" + depends on NET + help + Enable auditing infrastructure that can be used with another + kernel subsystem, such as SELinux (which requires this for + logging of avc messages output). Does not do system-call + auditing without CONFIG_AUDITSYSCALL. + +Features that might still be considered unstable should be defined as +dependent on "EXPERIMENTAL": + +config SLUB + depends on EXPERIMENTAL && !ARCH_USES_SLAB_PAGE_STRUCT + bool "SLUB (Unqueued Allocator)" + ... + +while seriously dangerous features (such as write support for certain +filesystems) should advertise this prominently in their prompt string: + +config ADFS_FS_RW + bool "ADFS write support (DANGEROUS)" + depends on ADFS_FS + ... + +For full documentation on the configuration files, see the file +Documentation/kbuild/kconfig-language.txt. + + + Chapter 11: 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 12: 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 13: 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"; use "do not" or "don't" instead. Make the messages +concise, clear, and unambiguous. + +Kernel messages do not have to be terminated with a period. + +Printing numbers in parentheses (%d) adds no value and should be avoided. + +There are a number of driver model diagnostic macros in <linux/device.h> +which you should use to make sure messages are matched to the right device +and driver, and are tagged with the right level: dev_err(), dev_warn(), +dev_info(), and so forth. For messages that aren't associated with a +particular device, <linux/printk.h> defines pr_debug() and pr_info(). + +Coming up with good debugging messages can be quite a challenge; and once +you have them, they can be a huge help for remote troubleshooting. Such +messages should be compiled out when the DEBUG symbol is not defined (that +is, by default they are not included). When you use dev_dbg() or pr_debug(), +that's automatic. Many subsystems have Kconfig options to turn on -DDEBUG. +A related convention uses VERBOSE_DEBUG to add dev_vdbg() messages to the +ones already enabled by DEBUG. + + + Chapter 14: Allocating memory + +The kernel provides the following general purpose memory allocators: +kmalloc(), kzalloc(), kcalloc(), vmalloc(), and vzalloc(). 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 15: 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 12), 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 milliseconds. There are a LOT of cpu cycles +that can go into these 5 milliseconds. + +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 16: Function return values and names + +Functions can return values of many different kinds, and one of the +most common is a value indicating whether the function succeeded or +failed. Such a value can be represented as an error-code integer +(-Exxx = failure, 0 = success) or a "succeeded" boolean (0 = failure, +non-zero = success). + +Mixing up these two sorts of representations is a fertile source of +difficult-to-find bugs. If the C language included a strong distinction +between integers and booleans then the compiler would find these mistakes +for us... but it doesn't. To help prevent such bugs, always follow this +convention: + + If the name of a function is an action or an imperative command, + the function should return an error-code integer. If the name + is a predicate, the function should return a "succeeded" boolean. + +For example, "add work" is a command, and the add_work() function returns 0 +for success or -EBUSY for failure. In the same way, "PCI device present" is +a predicate, and the pci_dev_present() function returns 1 if it succeeds in +finding a matching device or 0 if it doesn't. + +All EXPORTed functions must respect this convention, and so should all +public functions. Private (static) functions need not, but it is +recommended that they do. + +Functions whose return value is the actual result of a computation, rather +than an indication of whether the computation succeeded, are not subject to +this rule. Generally they indicate failure by returning some out-of-range +result. Typical examples would be functions that return pointers; they use +NULL or the ERR_PTR mechanism to report failure. + + + Chapter 17: Don't re-invent the kernel macros + +The header file include/linux/kernel.h contains a number of macros that +you should use, rather than explicitly coding some variant of them yourself. +For example, if you need to calculate the length of an array, take advantage +of the macro + + #define ARRAY_SIZE(x) (sizeof(x) / sizeof((x)[0])) + +Similarly, if you need to calculate the size of some structure member, use + + #define FIELD_SIZEOF(t, f) (sizeof(((t*)0)->f)) + +There are also min() and max() macros that do strict type checking if you +need them. Feel free to peruse that header file to see what else is already +defined that you shouldn't reproduce in your code. + + + Chapter 18: Editor modelines and other cruft + +Some editors can interpret configuration information embedded in source files, +indicated with special markers. For example, emacs interprets lines marked +like this: + +-*- mode: c -*- + +Or like this: + +/* +Local Variables: +compile-command: "gcc -DMAGIC_DEBUG_FLAG foo.c" +End: +*/ + +Vim interprets markers that look like this: + +/* vim:set sw=8 noet */ + +Do not include any of these in source files. People have their own personal +editor configurations, and your source files should not override them. This +includes markers for indentation and mode configuration. People may use their +own custom mode, or may have some other magic method for making indentation +work correctly. + + + + Appendix I: 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/ + |