From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Julia Lawall Subject: Re: [patch v2] PM / devfreq: exynos-nocp: Remove incorrect IS_ERR() check Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 15:54:43 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: References: <20160526064541.GA6680@mwanda> <5746AFE3.6030606@samsung.com> <20160526115629.GD10957@mwanda> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: kernel-janitors-owner@vger.kernel.org To: cw00.choi@samsung.com Cc: Dan Carpenter , Julia Lawall , MyungJoo Ham , Kyungmin Park , Kukjin Kim , Krzysztof Kozlowski , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , linux-samsung-soc , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 26 May 2016, Chanwoo Choi wrote: > On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 8:56 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 05:12:19PM +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote: > >> I don't recommend that you mention the name of engineer on patch description > >> directly. > > > > This really is normal. I've been mentioned over 100 times in commit > > messages like 7051924f771 (xillybus: Move out of staging). > > I'm still reluctant to use the name on description. > How about you use the Suggested-by tag as following? > > [julia.lawall : Suggest that it is not necessary to check return value > of platform_get_resource] > Suggested-by: Julia Lawall Like Dan, I really don't see the problem. The text in [ ] looks ugly. A suggested by by itself would not be appropriate, since I didn't identify the original issue. There are ther patches that refer to peoples' comments in a similar way. Example: d8aacd87180141ff6b812b53de77a4336e87c91a julia