Re: [PATCH v1 4/4] pci: Re-use new dmi_get_bios_year() helper

[Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>]

On Mon, 2018-02-26 at 12:19 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 03:27:04PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Fri, 2018-02-23 at 15:40 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 02:59:23PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > ...instead of open coding its functionality.
> > > 
> > > Same comment about making the changelog complete, independent of
> > > the
> > > subject.
> > 
> > Any suggestion how it would look like? (Same question for previous
> > comment)
> 
>   PCI: Re-use new dmi_get_bios_year() helper
> 
>   Use new dmi_get_bios_year() helper instead of open-coding its
>   functionality.
> 
> The usual document structure is something like:
> 
>   TITLE
> 
>   This abstract contains a summary of the entire document, in a few
>   paragraphs of complete sentences.
> 
> Where "TITLE" makes sense all by itself, even without reading the
> body, and "Body" is a complete statement that also makes sense all by
> itself without having to read "TITLE" first.
> 

Thank you for a hint!

> Granted, it's trivial, but following the convention improves
> readability slightly because it fits the reader's expectations.

> When the body is "...instead of open coding its functionality", it's a
> bit of a hiccup because I have to start over and look back up to the
> title to re-read the thing as a whole.

OK, I got your point, though I don't like duplication in the subject and
body.


-- 
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy