From: Dave <kilroyd@googlemail.com>
To: Walter Goldens <goldenstranger@yahoo.com>
Cc: "John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix several minor description typos
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 22:49:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BF1B9EA.8060009@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <974011.51480.qm@web56808.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
You may want to prefix the patch title with 'wireless:', and include in
the commitlog a description what type of errors you are correcting. In
this case I'd guess 'avoid word repetition'.
Most of the changes seem obviously correct. However a couple:
On 17/05/10 20:33, Walter Goldens wrote:
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/orinoco/main.h
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/orinoco/main.h
> @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@
> /* Compile time configuration and compatibility stuff */
> /********************************************************************/
>
> -/* We do this this way to avoid ifdefs in the actual code */
> +/* We do that this way to avoid ifdefs in the actual code */
> #ifdef WIRELESS_SPY
> #define SPY_NUMBER(priv) (priv->spy_data.spy_number)
> #else
The latter construction doesn't make sense (to me). The former does,
even if it is a little clumsy. If the comment is still useful, I suggest
rewording it as something like:
/* Define SPY_NUMBER like this to avoid ifdefs in the actual code */
> --- a/include/linux/ieee80211.h
> +++ b/include/linux/ieee80211.h
> @@ -302,7 +302,7 @@ static inline int ieee80211_is_data_qos(
> static inline int ieee80211_is_data_present(__le16 fc)
> {
> /*
> - * mask with 0x40 and test that that bit is clear to only return true
> + * mask with 0x40 and test that this bit is clear to only return true
> * for the data-containing substypes.
> */
> return (fc & cpu_to_le16(IEEE80211_FCTL_FTYPE | 0x40)) ==
You may also want to correct the spelling of 'subtypes' here. I also
think that this could be reworded better. After consulting
IEE802.11-2007, section 7.1.3.1.2, I'd suggest:
/* Only return true for the data-containing subtypes.
* Bit 0x40 indicates the frame subtype does not contain a Frame Body
* field (i.e. there is no data). This bit should not be set.
*/
But I'd confirm with one of the core wireless developers before making
that change. It may also be worth changing the code to use
IEEE80211_STYPE_NULLFUNC instead of 0x40.
Regards,
Dave.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-05-17 21:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-05-17 19:33 [PATCH] fix several minor description typos Walter Goldens
2010-05-17 21:49 ` Dave [this message]
2010-05-18 11:44 ` [PATCH v1] wireless: " Walter Goldens
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4BF1B9EA.8060009@gmail.com \
--to=kilroyd@googlemail.com \
--cc=goldenstranger@yahoo.com \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox