From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752699AbbEHHzY (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 May 2015 03:55:24 -0400 Received: from mail-pd0-f176.google.com ([209.85.192.176]:36322 "EHLO mail-pd0-f176.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752353AbbEHHzS (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 May 2015 03:55:18 -0400 Date: Fri, 8 May 2015 13:24:32 +0530 From: Sudip Mukherjee To: Dan Carpenter Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, Benjamin Romer , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sparmaintainer@unisys.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] staging: unisys: remove unused variable Message-ID: <20150508075413.GA7663@sudip-PC> References: <1430991412-5753-1-git-send-email-sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com> <1430991412-5753-2-git-send-email-sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com> <20150507200432.GB27787@kroah.com> <20150508042444.GA3192@sudip-PC> <20150508073449.GM14154@mwanda> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150508073449.GM14154@mwanda> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 10:34:49AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 09:54:44AM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > > On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 10:04:32PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 03:06:52PM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > > > > the previous patch of the series made this variable unused. > > > > > > What do you mean? There was only one other patch in this series, never > > > send a patch that causes a build warning. > > This patch is 2/2 , the 1/2 patch when applied will cause a build > > warning about unused variable. > > > > should i then send a v2 mentioning that "1/2 will cause a build warning > > which is fixed in 2/2" ? > > > > Gar... No. Fold them together into one patch... > > The one thing per patch rule means that you shouldn't do half a thing > per patch. already sent that one combined patch. but this rule is really confusing me now .. :( if i can understand the devicemodel then this rule should not be tough to understand. so, what i understood till now: 1) any patch of the series should not break the build. (you told me that in my parport patch series :) ) 2) any patch of the series should not introduce build warning. 3) when i am modifying some line, i can make simple changes in style. but if its big change in style then that should be a separate patch. regards sudip > > regards, > dan carpenter >