From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-172.mta0.migadu.com (out-172.mta0.migadu.com [91.218.175.172]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E54087404E for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 12:19:24 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1777465166; cv=none; b=OQO4EstaMOv7rhGP64MRvUBAIobMwyvQm7o3Rhn93E7K1oSiBJIxWb4+DJCXMVbMD8z7pQcfgrTuFZVOvQdSfDYBYTBqf8ktHWqPDgl/Hk/pVxbVRXVZ5Nx+bNJvoggEtNbDjQIJF9TgmWczGPyXofaXQyflLyiXc2U1pMNHu7U= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1777465166; c=relaxed/simple; bh=45Rc7YucCVseBW9mD77/J6Ks9emScWJGkPVvcnLByEM=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=noKERB/wknK4j9JIJddl2Y+GSBBKBgaFZwUh0osJgNUTgyl/WlTSFv7zcdhLXPeOM/7gEM8UgjovW+lSkgOVnF3jL/VSyBq07i2fapmuqVYAhc1p0kJSIgXpwUqziPIUOmh5jUTpq1fjAHjjlZYJkSXdx9IdgfZBbuEc316XwLA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=XCkLc6ym; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="XCkLc6ym" Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2026 14:18:55 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1777465152; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=4AtO44FUUMAw9WtUaqRhueALNI/nDbWz57GT/q6WJzA=; b=XCkLc6ym2ZgDDOzxVJhqm2l0dOjAZe979rpnD1mkW/Qhbb6bkJI+WVB61IJs4z8NM4NFBf OvvGhXIb6eSDdB4V9p11MhjVTkT78wadmF6Pf0fap3HSTaExnQoTer1h7YaRpvfDgnbNHC DuZuL/Fl1GSm50vdMHOXV27/4YTFiIE= X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Luka Gejak To: Dan Carpenter CC: Linus Probert , gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, luka.gejak@linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] staging: rtl8723bs: remove warnings in rtw_btcoex.h In-Reply-To: References: <12186A7D-522A-4900-9E4A-E2B575930A72@linux.dev> <2097F9CE-F003-4BE1-AEF5-0B30294973FB@linux.dev> <177745958799.1254637.4289009650997698120.b4-reply@b4> Message-ID: <5103B748-E9AE-4164-B81F-CB24326F3F7D@linux.dev> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT On April 29, 2026 2:06:30 PM GMT+02:00, Dan Carpenter = wrote: >On Wed, Apr 29, 2026 at 01:34:41PM +0200, Luka Gejak wrote: >> On April 29, 2026 12:46:27 PM GMT+02:00, Linus Probert wrote: >> >On 2026-04-29 12:24:53+02:00, Luka Gejak wrote: >> >> On April 29, 2026 12:18:12 PM GMT+02:00, Luka Gejak wrote: >> >>=20 >> >> >> This series eliminates all remaining checkpatch warnings in >> >> > >> >> >LGTM, so for the patch series: >> >> > >> >> >Reviewed-by: Luka Gejak >> >> > >> >> >Best regards, >> >> >Luka Gejak >> >>=20 >> >> One note: >> >> For the future cleanup series, feel free to squash identical logical= =20 >> >> changes into a single patch to keep the commit history concise=2E It= 's=20 >> >> up to Greg if he wants v2 but logic is sound as is=2E >> >> Best regards, >> >> Luka Gejak >> > >> >I will make a note of that=2E In this case what do you consider an >> >identical logical change? What would you suggest that I squash? >> > >> >Br, >> >Linus >> > >>=20 >> A logical change refers to the type of cleanup being done=2E In your=20 >> series, patches 3-8 all do the exact same thing: fix CamelCase names=20 >> for functions defined in rtw_btcoex=2Eh=2E Instead of 6 separate commit= s,=20 >> those could be squashed into a single patch=2E But as I already said it= =20 >> is up to Greg if he wants v2 or if he wants to keep v1 as is=2E Either= =20 >> way code itself is good=2E > >Greg has said in the past he prefers them all as separate changes the >way this patchset does it=2E He recently asked somone to split up a >typedef patch into one typedef per patch=2E > >regards, >dan carpenter > Thanks for that information Dan, I wasn't awear of that=2E Best regards, Luka Gejak