From: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com>
To: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@linux.microsoft.com>
Cc: Shreeya Patel <shreeya.patel23498@gmail.com>,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, outreachy-kernel@googlegroups.com,
daniel.baluta@gmail.com, hverkuil@xs4all.nl,
Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net
Subject: Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH] Staging: rtl8723bs: rtw_mlme: Remove unnecessary conditions
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 11:34:16 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200312113416.23d3db5c@elisabeth> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <61a6c3d7-6592-b57b-6466-995309302cc2@linux.microsoft.com>
Hi Lakshmi,
On Wed, 11 Mar 2020 19:42:06 -0700
Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@linux.microsoft.com> wrote:
> On 3/11/2020 6:58 AM, Shreeya Patel wrote:
>
> > Remove unnecessary if and else conditions since both are leading to the
> > initialization of "phtpriv->ampdu_enable" with the same value.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Shreeya Patel <shreeya.patel23498@gmail.com>
>
> Stating this based on the patch descriptions I have seen.
> Others, please advise\correct me if I am wrong.
>
> Patch description should state the problem first[1] and then describe
> how that is fixed in the given patch.
>
> For example:
>
> In the function rtw_update_ht_cap(), phtpriv->ampdu_enable is set to the
> same value in both if and else statements.
>
> This patch removes this unnecessary if-else statement.
That's my general preference as well, but I can't find any point in the
"Describe your changes" section of submitting-patches.rst actually
defining the order. I wouldn't imply that from the sequence the steps
are presented in.
In case it's possible to say everything with a single statement as
Shreeya did here, though, I guess that becomes rather a linguistic
factor, and I personally prefer the concise version here.
--
Stefano
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-12 10:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-11 13:58 [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH] Staging: rtl8723bs: rtw_mlme: Remove unnecessary conditions Shreeya Patel
2020-03-12 2:42 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2020-03-12 10:34 ` Stefano Brivio [this message]
2020-03-12 10:49 ` Julia Lawall
2020-03-12 16:31 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2020-03-13 7:48 ` Dan Carpenter
2020-03-13 7:43 ` Dan Carpenter
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=20200312113416.23d3db5c@elisabeth \
--to=sbrivio@redhat.com \
--cc=Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net \
--cc=daniel.baluta@gmail.com \
--cc=devel@driverdev.osuosl.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hverkuil@xs4all.nl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nramas@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=outreachy-kernel@googlegroups.com \
--cc=shreeya.patel23498@gmail.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