From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-gx0-f174.google.com ([209.85.161.174]:35913 "EHLO mail-gx0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752338Ab1KUW4q (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Nov 2011 17:56:46 -0500 Received: by ggnr5 with SMTP id r5so2894198ggn.19 for ; Mon, 21 Nov 2011 14:56:45 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 20:02:17 -0300 From: Ezequiel To: Hans de Goede Cc: linux-media@vger.kernel.org, moinejf@free.fr, ospite@studenti.unina.it Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] [media] gspca: replaced static allocation by video_device_alloc/video_device_release Message-ID: <20111121230217.GA2569@devel2> References: <20111119214621.GA2739@localhost> <4EC8D069.1080204@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4EC8D069.1080204@redhat.com> Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 11:03:21AM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > NACK again! There is no reason to do this, it just makes > the code more complicated without gaining anything. As already > commented by Antonio Ospite your commit message lacks the why of > this patch / the reason to do such a patch. The diffstat clearly > shows it is adding code not removing / simplifying it and it > so doing so without any good reasons! > Yes, it's true: I omit the the reason in the commit message. The point of the patch was improving readability of the code. But it was altogether wrong, as Jean-Francois patiently explained to me in another thread. Thanks to you too for the patience, Ezequiel.