From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>,
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] genirq/affinity: allow driver to setup managed IRQ's affinity
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 08:39:50 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190211143950.GA151039@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190211035358.GA8638@ming.t460p>
On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:54:00AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2019 at 05:30:41PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 Jan 2019, Ming Lei wrote:
> >
> > > This patch introduces callback of .setup_affinity into 'struct
> > > irq_affinity', so that:
> >
> > Please see Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst. Search for 'This
> > patch' ....
>
> Sorry for that, because I am not a native English speaker and it looks a bit
> difficult for me to understand the subtle difference.
I think Thomas is saying that instead of "This patch introduces
callback ...", you could say "Introduce callback of ...".
The changelog is *part* of the patch, so the context is obvious and
there's no need to include the words "This patch".
I make the same changes to patches I receive. In fact, I would go
even further and say "Add callback .setup_affinity() ..." because "add"
means the same as "introduce" but is shorter and simpler.
Bjorn
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: helgaas@kernel.org (Bjorn Helgaas)
Subject: [PATCH 2/5] genirq/affinity: allow driver to setup managed IRQ's affinity
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 08:39:50 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190211143950.GA151039@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190211035358.GA8638@ming.t460p>
On Mon, Feb 11, 2019@11:54:00AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2019@05:30:41PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 Jan 2019, Ming Lei wrote:
> >
> > > This patch introduces callback of .setup_affinity into 'struct
> > > irq_affinity', so that:
> >
> > Please see Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst. Search for 'This
> > patch' ....
>
> Sorry for that, because I am not a native English speaker and it looks a bit
> difficult for me to understand the subtle difference.
I think Thomas is saying that instead of "This patch introduces
callback ...", you could say "Introduce callback of ...".
The changelog is *part* of the patch, so the context is obvious and
there's no need to include the words "This patch".
I make the same changes to patches I receive. In fact, I would go
even further and say "Add callback .setup_affinity() ..." because "add"
means the same as "introduce" but is shorter and simpler.
Bjorn
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-11 15:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-25 9:53 [PATCH 0/5] genirq/affinity: introduce .setup_affinity to support allocating interrupt sets Ming Lei
2019-01-25 9:53 ` Ming Lei
2019-01-25 9:53 ` [PATCH 1/5] genirq/affinity: move allocation of 'node_to_cpumask' to irq_build_affinity_masks Ming Lei
2019-01-25 9:53 ` Ming Lei
2019-02-07 22:02 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2019-02-07 22:02 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2019-01-25 9:53 ` [PATCH 2/5] genirq/affinity: allow driver to setup managed IRQ's affinity Ming Lei
2019-01-25 9:53 ` Ming Lei
2019-02-07 22:21 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2019-02-07 22:21 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2019-02-10 9:22 ` Ming Lei
2019-02-10 9:22 ` Ming Lei
2019-02-10 16:30 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-02-10 16:30 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-02-11 3:54 ` Ming Lei
2019-02-11 3:54 ` Ming Lei
2019-02-11 14:39 ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2019-02-11 14:39 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2019-02-11 22:38 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-02-11 22:38 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-02-12 11:17 ` Ming Lei
2019-02-12 11:17 ` Ming Lei
2019-01-25 9:53 ` [PATCH 3/5] genirq/affinity: introduce irq_build_affinity() Ming Lei
2019-01-25 9:53 ` Ming Lei
2019-01-25 9:53 ` [PATCH 4/5] nvme-pci: simplify nvme_setup_irqs() via .setup_affinity callback Ming Lei
2019-01-25 9:53 ` Ming Lei
2019-02-10 16:39 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-02-10 16:39 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-02-11 3:58 ` Ming Lei
2019-02-11 3:58 ` Ming Lei
2019-02-10 18:49 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-02-10 18:49 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-02-11 4:09 ` Ming Lei
2019-02-11 4:09 ` Ming Lei
2019-01-25 9:53 ` [PATCH 5/5] genirq/affinity: remove support for allocating interrupt sets Ming Lei
2019-01-25 9:53 ` Ming Lei
2019-02-07 22:22 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2019-02-07 22:22 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2019-01-25 9:56 ` [PATCH 0/5] genirq/affinity: introduce .setup_affinity to support " Ming Lei
2019-01-25 9:56 ` Ming Lei
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=20190211143950.GA151039@google.com \
--to=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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.