From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vinod Koul Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/22] soundwire: fix SPDX license for header files Date: Thu, 2 May 2019 12:14:38 +0530 Message-ID: <20190502064438.GJ3845@vkoul-mobl.Dlink> References: <20190501155745.21806-1-pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com> <20190501155745.21806-3-pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com> <20190502051440.GA3845@vkoul-mobl.Dlink> <20190502063139.GA14347@kroah.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190502063139.GA14347@kroah.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Greg KH Cc: Pierre-Louis Bossart , alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tiwai@suse.de, broonie@kernel.org, liam.r.girdwood@linux.intel.com, jank@cadence.com, joe@perches.com, srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org, Sanyog Kale List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On 02-05-19, 08:31, Greg KH wrote: > On Thu, May 02, 2019 at 10:46:49AM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > > On 01-05-19, 10:57, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: > > > No C++ comments in .h files > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Takashi Iwai > > > Signed-off-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart > > > --- > > > drivers/soundwire/bus.h | 4 ++-- > > > drivers/soundwire/cadence_master.h | 4 ++-- > > > drivers/soundwire/intel.h | 4 ++-- > > > > As I said previously this touches subsystem header as well as driver > > headers which is not ideal. > > What? Who knows that? Who cares? Well at least Pierre knows that very well :) He is designate Reviewer of this subsystem. > This is doing "one logical thing" to all of the needed files. Your > split of "this is a driver" vs. "this is a subsystem" split is _VERY_ > arbritary. > > That's just too picky and assumes a subsystem-internal-knowledge much > deeper than anyone submitting a normal cleanup patch would ever know. Sure I do agree that this assumes internal knowledge but the contributor knows the subsystem extremely well and he knows the different parts. For drive by contributor I agree things would be not that picky :) Even considering the patch series, some split was even file based and in this case not done. All I ask is for consistency in the series proposed. > I think you have swung too far to the "too picky" side, you might want > to dial it back. Sure given that this is code cleanup I will split them up and push. Shouldn't take much of my time. Thanks for the advise. -- ~Vinod