From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
To: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com>
Cc: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>,
linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org,
Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>,
Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@gmail.com>,
Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Kernel Janitors List <kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org>,
Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] backlight-tosa: Delete owner assignment
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:46:12 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160815134612.GH25844@dell> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOMGZ=EWsO_pRg+s+hnPmwRePcrijFK3v+SRKTizfbqyY83iqQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016, Vegard Nossum wrote:
> On 15 August 2016 at 13:12, SF Markus Elfring
> <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> > From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
> > Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:03:29 +0200
> >
> > The field "owner" is set by core. Thus delete an extra initialisation.
>
> Hi,
>
> Just a small nit on the patch title: "delete owner assignment" is
> virtually useless as a title because it has no meaning without the
> broader context and only describes the literal change. It's like
> naming a patch "add a line" or "change the code"; it serves no
> purpose.
>
> How about "backlight-tosa: delete _unnecessary_ assignment"? This
> immediately communicates the reason for/intent of the patch (there is
> unnecessary code, thus we can simplify it).
backlight-tosa: Do not manually assign THIS_MODULE to .owner
This is unnecessary because ...
> (Sorry about singling out this patch and the apparent bikeshedding,
> this comment obviously applies to a lot of patches by a lot of
> authors!)
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Vegard
--
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
To: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com>
Cc: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>,
linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org,
Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>,
Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@gmail.com>,
Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Kernel Janitors List <kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org>,
Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] backlight-tosa: Delete owner assignment
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:46:12 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160815134612.GH25844@dell> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOMGZ=EWsO_pRg+s+hnPmwRePcrijFK3v+SRKTizfbqyY83iqQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016, Vegard Nossum wrote:
> On 15 August 2016 at 13:12, SF Markus Elfring
> <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> > From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
> > Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:03:29 +0200
> >
> > The field "owner" is set by core. Thus delete an extra initialisation.
>
> Hi,
>
> Just a small nit on the patch title: "delete owner assignment" is
> virtually useless as a title because it has no meaning without the
> broader context and only describes the literal change. It's like
> naming a patch "add a line" or "change the code"; it serves no
> purpose.
>
> How about "backlight-tosa: delete _unnecessary_ assignment"? This
> immediately communicates the reason for/intent of the patch (there is
> unnecessary code, thus we can simplify it).
backlight-tosa: Do not manually assign THIS_MODULE to .owner
This is unnecessary because ...
> (Sorry about singling out this patch and the apparent bikeshedding,
> this comment obviously applies to a lot of patches by a lot of
> authors!)
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Vegard
--
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
To: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com>
Cc: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>,
linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org,
Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>,
Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@gmail.com>,
Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Kernel Janitors List <kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org>,
Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] backlight-tosa: Delete owner assignment
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 14:46:12 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160815134612.GH25844@dell> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOMGZ=EWsO_pRg+s+hnPmwRePcrijFK3v+SRKTizfbqyY83iqQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, 15 Aug 2016, Vegard Nossum wrote:
> On 15 August 2016 at 13:12, SF Markus Elfring
> <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> > From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
> > Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:03:29 +0200
> >
> > The field "owner" is set by core. Thus delete an extra initialisation.
>
> Hi,
>
> Just a small nit on the patch title: "delete owner assignment" is
> virtually useless as a title because it has no meaning without the
> broader context and only describes the literal change. It's like
> naming a patch "add a line" or "change the code"; it serves no
> purpose.
>
> How about "backlight-tosa: delete _unnecessary_ assignment"? This
> immediately communicates the reason for/intent of the patch (there is
> unnecessary code, thus we can simplify it).
backlight-tosa: Do not manually assign THIS_MODULE to .owner
This is unnecessary because ...
> (Sorry about singling out this patch and the apparent bikeshedding,
> this comment obviously applies to a lot of patches by a lot of
> authors!)
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Vegard
--
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-15 13:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-15 11:12 [PATCH] backlight-tosa: Delete owner assignment SF Markus Elfring
2016-08-15 11:12 ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-08-15 11:39 ` Vegard Nossum
2016-08-15 11:39 ` Vegard Nossum
2016-08-15 13:25 ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-08-15 13:25 ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-08-15 13:37 ` Vegard Nossum
2016-08-15 13:37 ` Vegard Nossum
2016-08-15 13:46 ` Lee Jones [this message]
2016-08-15 13:46 ` [PATCH] " Lee Jones
2016-08-15 13:46 ` Lee Jones
2016-08-16 15:17 ` [PATCH v2] backlight-tosa: Delete unnecessary assignment for the field "owner" SF Markus Elfring
2016-08-16 15:17 ` SF Markus Elfring
2016-08-17 9:49 ` Lee Jones
2016-08-17 9:49 ` Lee Jones
2016-08-17 9:49 ` Lee Jones
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=20160815134612.GH25844@dell \
--to=lee.jones@linaro.org \
--cc=elfring@users.sourceforge.net \
--cc=jingoohan1@gmail.com \
--cc=julia.lawall@lip6.fr \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=plagnioj@jcrosoft.com \
--cc=tomi.valkeinen@ti.com \
--cc=vegard.nossum@gmail.com \
/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.