diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'CODING_STYLE.rst')
-rw-r--r-- | CODING_STYLE.rst | 251 |
1 files changed, 251 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/CODING_STYLE.rst b/CODING_STYLE.rst new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..713357cb80 --- /dev/null +++ b/CODING_STYLE.rst @@ -0,0 +1,251 @@ +================= +QEMU Coding Style +================= + +.. contents:: Table of Contents + +Please use the script checkpatch.pl in the scripts directory to check +patches before submitting. + +Whitespace +========== + +Of course, the most important aspect in any coding style is whitespace. +Crusty old coders who have trouble spotting the glasses on their noses +can tell the difference between a tab and eight spaces from a distance +of approximately fifteen parsecs. Many a flamewar has been fought and +lost on this issue. + +QEMU indents are four spaces. Tabs are never used, except in Makefiles +where they have been irreversibly coded into the syntax. +Spaces of course are superior to tabs because: + +* You have just one way to specify whitespace, not two. Ambiguity breeds + mistakes. +* The confusion surrounding 'use tabs to indent, spaces to justify' is gone. +* Tab indents push your code to the right, making your screen seriously + unbalanced. +* Tabs will be rendered incorrectly on editors who are misconfigured not + to use tab stops of eight positions. +* Tabs are rendered badly in patches, causing off-by-one errors in almost + every line. +* It is the QEMU coding style. + +Do not leave whitespace dangling off the ends of lines. + +Multiline Indent +---------------- + +There are several places where indent is necessary: + +* if/else +* while/for +* function definition & call + +When breaking up a long line to fit within line width, we need a proper indent +for the following lines. + +In case of if/else, while/for, align the secondary lines just after the +opening parenthesis of the first. + +For example: + +.. code-block:: c + + if (a == 1 && + b == 2) { + + while (a == 1 && + b == 2) { + +In case of function, there are several variants: + +* 4 spaces indent from the beginning +* align the secondary lines just after the opening parenthesis of the first + +For example: + +.. code-block:: c + + do_something(x, y, + z); + + do_something(x, y, + z); + + do_something(x, do_another(y, + z)); + +Line width +========== + +Lines should be 80 characters; try not to make them longer. + +Sometimes it is hard to do, especially when dealing with QEMU subsystems +that use long function or symbol names. Even in that case, do not make +lines much longer than 80 characters. + +Rationale: + +* Some people like to tile their 24" screens with a 6x4 matrix of 80x24 + xterms and use vi in all of them. The best way to punish them is to + let them keep doing it. +* Code and especially patches is much more readable if limited to a sane + line length. Eighty is traditional. +* The four-space indentation makes the most common excuse ("But look + at all that white space on the left!") moot. +* It is the QEMU coding style. + +Naming +====== + +Variables are lower_case_with_underscores; easy to type and read. Structured +type names are in CamelCase; harder to type but standing out. Enum type +names and function type names should also be in CamelCase. Scalar type +names are lower_case_with_underscores_ending_with_a_t, like the POSIX +uint64_t and family. Note that this last convention contradicts POSIX +and is therefore likely to be changed. + +When wrapping standard library functions, use the prefix ``qemu_`` to alert +readers that they are seeing a wrapped version; otherwise avoid this prefix. + +Block structure +=============== + +Every indented statement is braced; even if the block contains just one +statement. The opening brace is on the line that contains the control +flow statement that introduces the new block; the closing brace is on the +same line as the else keyword, or on a line by itself if there is no else +keyword. Example: + +.. code-block:: c + + if (a == 5) { + printf("a was 5.\n"); + } else if (a == 6) { + printf("a was 6.\n"); + } else { + printf("a was something else entirely.\n"); + } + +Note that 'else if' is considered a single statement; otherwise a long if/ +else if/else if/.../else sequence would need an indent for every else +statement. + +An exception is the opening brace for a function; for reasons of tradition +and clarity it comes on a line by itself: + +.. code-block:: c + + void a_function(void) + { + do_something(); + } + +Rationale: a consistent (except for functions...) bracing style reduces +ambiguity and avoids needless churn when lines are added or removed. +Furthermore, it is the QEMU coding style. + +Declarations +============ + +Mixed declarations (interleaving statements and declarations within +blocks) are generally not allowed; declarations should be at the beginning +of blocks. + +Every now and then, an exception is made for declarations inside a +#ifdef or #ifndef block: if the code looks nicer, such declarations can +be placed at the top of the block even if there are statements above. +On the other hand, however, it's often best to move that #ifdef/#ifndef +block to a separate function altogether. + +Conditional statements +====================== + +When comparing a variable for (in)equality with a constant, list the +constant on the right, as in: + +.. code-block:: c + + if (a == 1) { + /* Reads like: "If a equals 1" */ + do_something(); + } + +Rationale: Yoda conditions (as in 'if (1 == a)') are awkward to read. +Besides, good compilers already warn users when '==' is mis-typed as '=', +even when the constant is on the right. + +Comment style +============= + +We use traditional C-style /``*`` ``*``/ comments and avoid // comments. + +Rationale: The // form is valid in C99, so this is purely a matter of +consistency of style. The checkpatch script will warn you about this. + +Multiline comment blocks should have a row of stars on the left, +and the initial /``*`` and terminating ``*``/ both on their own lines: + +.. code-block:: c + + /* + * like + * this + */ + +This is the same format required by the Linux kernel coding style. + +(Some of the existing comments in the codebase use the GNU Coding +Standards form which does not have stars on the left, or other +variations; avoid these when writing new comments, but don't worry +about converting to the preferred form unless you're editing that +comment anyway.) + +Rationale: Consistency, and ease of visually picking out a multiline +comment from the surrounding code. + +trace-events style +================== + +0x prefix +--------- + +In trace-events files, use a '0x' prefix to specify hex numbers, as in: + +.. code-block:: + + some_trace(unsigned x, uint64_t y) "x 0x%x y 0x" PRIx64 + +An exception is made for groups of numbers that are hexadecimal by +convention and separated by the symbols '.', '/', ':', or ' ' (such as +PCI bus id): + +.. code-block:: + + another_trace(int cssid, int ssid, int dev_num) "bus id: %x.%x.%04x" + +However, you can use '0x' for such groups if you want. Anyway, be sure that +it is obvious that numbers are in hex, ex.: + +.. code-block:: + + data_dump(uint8_t c1, uint8_t c2, uint8_t c3) "bytes (in hex): %02x %02x %02x" + +Rationale: hex numbers are hard to read in logs when there is no 0x prefix, +especially when (occasionally) the representation doesn't contain any letters +and especially in one line with other decimal numbers. Number groups are allowed +to not use '0x' because for some things notations like %x.%x.%x are used not +only in Qemu. Also dumping raw data bytes with '0x' is less readable. + +'#' printf flag +--------------- + +Do not use printf flag '#', like '%#x'. + +Rationale: there are two ways to add a '0x' prefix to printed number: '0x%...' +and '%#...'. For consistency the only one way should be used. Arguments for +'0x%' are: + +* it is more popular +* '%#' omits the 0x for the value 0 which makes output inconsistent |