From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lee Jones Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:46:12 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] backlight-tosa: Delete owner assignment Message-Id: <20160815134612.GH25844@dell> List-Id: References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: Vegard Nossum Cc: SF Markus Elfring , linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard , Jingoo Han , Tomi Valkeinen , LKML , Kernel Janitors List , Julia Lawall On Mon, 15 Aug 2016, Vegard Nossum wrote: > On 15 August 2016 at 13:12, SF Markus Elfring > wrote: > > From: Markus Elfring > > Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:03:29 +0200 > > > > The field "owner" is set by core. Thus delete an extra initialisation. >=20 > Hi, >=20 > 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. >=20 > 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!) >=20 > Thanks, >=20 >=20 > Vegard --=20 Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org =E2=94=82 Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog