From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: SF Markus Elfring Subject: Re: tps65090-charger: Delete an error message for a failed memory allocation in two functions Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2017 21:47:34 +0100 Message-ID: References: <1513450432.4647.47.camel@perches.com> <4beb0d2e-adf6-5eeb-43c7-7829d54c6656@users.sourceforge.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.15.3]:53547 "EHLO mout.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757020AbdLPUrn (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Dec 2017 15:47:43 -0500 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-GB Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: Julia Lawall , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org Cc: Joe Perches , Sebastian Reichel , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org >> I am still waiting for possibilities to improve also the corresponding >> reference documentation somehow as you know it already. > > If you require someone else to update the documentation to be able to > explain why the patch is useful, My approach is to refer to the Linux allocation failure report. > then it would seem that you do not know why the patch is useful, > and thus should not submit it. We tried to clarify other explanation approaches a few times. But it seems that we are stuck with specific software aspects. How would you like to see remaining open issues to be resolved there anyhow? Regards, Markus