All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: skarajga@visteon.com (Karajgaonkar, Saurabh (S.))
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] drivers/usb/: Simplify return statements
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 05:06:07 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150731050558.GA2481@alcatraz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150730162527.GL18246@saruman.tx.rr.com>

Sure, I'll do that. Just wanted to know whether I should split the patches and
send them in this same mail thread (may be something like [PATCH 01/04 V2])
or should I start new threads and send them separately to the respective maintainers.

Thanks and Regards,
Saurabh Karajgaonkar

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:25:27AM -0500, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 01:13:42PM +0000, Karajgaonkar, Saurabh (S.) wrote:
> > From: Saurabh Karajgaonkar <skarajga@visteon.com>
> > 
> > This patch is created using simple_return.cocci coccinelle script.
> > It replaces the redundant instances where variables are assigned
> > return value from functions and then used in return statements.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Saurabh Karajgaonkar <skarajga@visteon.com>
> 
> do you mind splitting this per-driver ? That makes it a lot easier for
> different maintainers to take their part. For example, I would take
> drivers/usb/phy/* and drivers/usb/musb/*
> 
> Alan Stern would handle drivers/usb/host/[uoe]hci*.[ch]
> 
> Mathias Nyman, driver/usb/host/xhci*.[ch]
> 
> and so on. Thanks
> 
> -- 
> balbi

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Karajgaonkar, Saurabh (S.)" <skarajga@visteon.com>
To: Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>
Cc: "srinivas.kandagatla@gmail.com" <srinivas.kandagatla@gmail.com>,
	"maxime.coquelin@st.com" <maxime.coquelin@st.com>,
	"patrice.chotard@st.com" <patrice.chotard@st.com>,
	"stern@rowland.harvard.edu" <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
	"gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	"mathias.nyman@intel.com" <mathias.nyman@intel.com>,
	"johan@kernel.org" <johan@kernel.org>,
	"sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com" 
	<sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com>,
	"Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr" <Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr>,
	"khilman@linaro.org" <khilman@linaro.org>,
	"rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
	"pmladek@suse.cz" <pmladek@suse.cz>,
	"wsa@the-dreams.de" <wsa@the-dreams.de>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"kernel@stlinux.com" <kernel@stlinux.com>,
	"linux-usb@vger.kernel.org" <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/usb/: Simplify return statements
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 05:06:07 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150731050558.GA2481@alcatraz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150730162527.GL18246@saruman.tx.rr.com>

Sure, I'll do that. Just wanted to know whether I should split the patches and
send them in this same mail thread (may be something like [PATCH 01/04 V2])
or should I start new threads and send them separately to the respective maintainers.

Thanks and Regards,
Saurabh Karajgaonkar

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:25:27AM -0500, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 01:13:42PM +0000, Karajgaonkar, Saurabh (S.) wrote:
> > From: Saurabh Karajgaonkar <skarajga@visteon.com>
> > 
> > This patch is created using simple_return.cocci coccinelle script.
> > It replaces the redundant instances where variables are assigned
> > return value from functions and then used in return statements.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Saurabh Karajgaonkar <skarajga@visteon.com>
> 
> do you mind splitting this per-driver ? That makes it a lot easier for
> different maintainers to take their part. For example, I would take
> drivers/usb/phy/* and drivers/usb/musb/*
> 
> Alan Stern would handle drivers/usb/host/[uoe]hci*.[ch]
> 
> Mathias Nyman, driver/usb/host/xhci*.[ch]
> 
> and so on. Thanks
> 
> -- 
> balbi


  reply	other threads:[~2015-07-31  5:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-07-30 13:13 [PATCH] drivers/usb/: Simplify return statements Karajgaonkar, Saurabh (S.)
2015-07-30 13:13 ` Karajgaonkar, Saurabh (S.)
2015-07-30 16:25 ` Felipe Balbi
2015-07-30 16:25   ` Felipe Balbi
2015-07-31  5:06   ` Karajgaonkar, Saurabh (S.) [this message]
2015-07-31  5:06     ` Karajgaonkar, Saurabh (S.)
2015-07-31 14:00     ` Felipe Balbi
2015-07-31 14:00       ` Felipe Balbi

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20150731050558.GA2481@alcatraz \
    --to=skarajga@visteon.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.