Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH 1/4] staging: rtl8723bs: core: Remove true and false comparison

[Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>]

On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 08:14:29AM +0530, Praveen Kumar wrote:
> On 22-10-2021 01:27, Kushal Kothari wrote:
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_cmd.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_cmd.c
> > index 2624e994513f..0be3a8dbeec8 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_cmd.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_cmd.c
> > @@ -371,7 +371,7 @@ void rtw_free_cmd_obj(struct cmd_obj *pcmd)
> >  void rtw_stop_cmd_thread(struct adapter *adapter)
> >  {
> >  	if (adapter->cmdThread &&
> > -		atomic_read(&(adapter->cmdpriv.cmdthd_running)) == true &&
> > +		atomic_read(&adapter->cmdpriv.cmdthd_running) &&
> 
> Lets keep it "atomic_read(&(adapter->cmdpriv.cmdthd_running))"
> and remove the parentheses in next patch.
> 

There is a certain amount of flexibility in fixing style errors which
occur on a line that you are already modifying.  But your advice is good
because 1) Then the inclination is to say "please fix the alignment as
well".  2)  There is already a [PATCH 2/4] which removes these extra
parentheses so it makes more sense to do it there.  3) This patchset
will need to be redone anyway because of the white space error in
[PATCH 4/4].

So, you are right, and especially in this case you're right.  But there
are always going to be minor issues with a patch and some of them we can
let slide.

I have occasionally waited for Greg to apply a patch and then sent an
email, "Greg has already applied your patch but next time do it like
this."  :P

regards,
dan carpenter