[PATCH] Staging: r8188eu: core: 'associcated' may be misspelled - perhaps 'associated'?

[PATCH] Staging: r8188eu: core: 'associcated' may be misspelled - perhaps 'associated'?

[Leonardo Araujo]

This patch fixes the following checkpatch.pl warning:

CHECK: 'associcated' may be misspelled - perhaps 'associated'?

Signed-off-by: Leonardo Araujo <leonardo.aa88@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c
index 1675e2e8439c..e02dd8e11c95 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c
@@ -819,7 +819,7 @@ static int rtw_ht_operation_update(struct adapter *padapter)
 
 void associated_clients_update(struct adapter *padapter, u8 updated)
 {
-	/* update associcated stations cap. */
+	/* update associated stations cap. */
 	if (updated) {
 		struct list_head *phead, *plist;
 		struct sta_info *psta = NULL;
@@ -972,7 +972,7 @@ void bss_cap_update_on_sta_join(struct adapter *padapter, struct sta_info *psta)
 		update_beacon(padapter, _HT_ADD_INFO_IE_, NULL, true);
 	}
 
-	/* update associcated stations cap. */
+	/* update associated stations cap. */
 	associated_clients_update(padapter,  beacon_updated);
 
 	DBG_88E("%s, updated =%d\n", __func__, beacon_updated);
@@ -1036,7 +1036,7 @@ u8 bss_cap_update_on_sta_leave(struct adapter *padapter, struct sta_info *psta)
 		update_beacon(padapter, _HT_ADD_INFO_IE_, NULL, true);
 	}
 
-	/* update associcated stations cap. */
+	/* update associated stations cap. */
 
 	DBG_88E("%s, updated =%d\n", __func__, beacon_updated);
 
-- 
2.29.0

Re: [PATCH] Staging: r8188eu: core: 'associcated' may be misspelled - perhaps 'associated'?

[Fabio M. De Francesco]

On martedì 8 febbraio 2022 00:42:10 CET Leonardo Araujo wrote:
> This patch fixes the following checkpatch.pl warning:
> 
> CHECK: 'associcated' may be misspelled - perhaps 'associated'?
> 
> Signed-off-by: Leonardo Araujo <leonardo.aa88@gmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
"Staging: r8188eu: core: 'associated' may be misspelled - perhaps 'associated'?" 
it's not the way patch subjects are created for inclusion in Linux.

Please follow what is clearly described in the "Philosophy of Linux kernel 
patches" document at https://kernelnewbies.org/PatchPhilosophy...

"In patch descriptions and in the subject, it is common and preferable to use 
present-tense, imperative language. Write as if you are telling git what to do 
with your patch.".

It's not my job to accept or reject patches for this subsystem and I don't want 
to tell you what to write but, if I were you, I'd send a v2 with a subject like 
"Fix misspelled word in comments" (or something else similar to this subject).

Furthermore, please take note that the name of this subsystem is "staging" (it 
is not "Staging").

Decide by yourself whether or not the other two patches that you submitted this 
morning have to be sent anew as v2 with due changes in the subjects.

Regards,

Fabio M. De Francesco  

Re: [PATCH] Staging: r8188eu: core: 'associcated' may be misspelled - perhaps 'associated'?

[Greg KH]

On Tue, Feb 08, 2022 at 09:09:10AM +0100, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> On martedì 8 febbraio 2022 00:42:10 CET Leonardo Araujo wrote:
> > This patch fixes the following checkpatch.pl warning:
> > 
> > CHECK: 'associcated' may be misspelled - perhaps 'associated'?
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Leonardo Araujo <leonardo.aa88@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c | 6 +++---
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > 
> "Staging: r8188eu: core: 'associated' may be misspelled - perhaps 'associated'?" 
> it's not the way patch subjects are created for inclusion in Linux.

I do not see anything wrong with this.  What do you think is not
acceptable?

> Please follow what is clearly described in the "Philosophy of Linux kernel 
> patches" document at https://kernelnewbies.org/PatchPhilosophy...

The in-kernel documentation describes this well also.

> "In patch descriptions and in the subject, it is common and preferable to use 
> present-tense, imperative language. Write as if you are telling git what to do 
> with your patch.".
> 
> It's not my job to accept or reject patches for this subsystem and I don't want 
> to tell you what to write but, if I were you, I'd send a v2 with a subject like 
> "Fix misspelled word in comments" (or something else similar to this subject).
> 
> Furthermore, please take note that the name of this subsystem is "staging" (it 
> is not "Staging").

Either is fine, I will not reject a change for an upper-case letter like
this.

> Decide by yourself whether or not the other two patches that you submitted this 
> morning have to be sent anew as v2 with due changes in the subjects.

I do not see a problem with this change at all, nothing needs to be
resubmitted.

greg k-h

Re: [PATCH] Staging: r8188eu: core: 'associcated' may be misspelled - perhaps 'associated'?

[Fabio M. De Francesco]

On martedì 8 febbraio 2022 09:26:26 CET Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 08, 2022 at 09:09:10AM +0100, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> > On martedì 8 febbraio 2022 00:42:10 CET Leonardo Araujo wrote:
> > > This patch fixes the following checkpatch.pl warning:
> > > 
> > > CHECK: 'associcated' may be misspelled - perhaps 'associated'?
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Leonardo Araujo <leonardo.aa88@gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c | 6 +++---
> > >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > "Staging: r8188eu: core: 'associated' may be misspelled - perhaps 'associated'?" 
> > it's not the way patch subjects are created for inclusion in Linux.
> 
> I do not see anything wrong with this.  What do you think is not
> acceptable?

My opinion is that the formal construction of a patch is important not less than
the code in it. However it's not that big deal, in this case. But for what my 
opinion is worth, having a subject that says what the patch must do and using an
imperative language is quite important.

I specified that it is not my job to accept or reject and said "if I were you []".
If you think that new contributor may be creative with the subjects of patches, this
is up to you to decide (obviously).

My intent was just to provide help to improve how to write subjects. I hope that 
Leonardo is going to become a productive member of this Community, so I thought 
that a little help for improving how to write subjects wouldn't hurt.  

> 
> > Please follow what is clearly described in the "Philosophy of Linux kernel 
> > patches" document at https://kernelnewbies.org/PatchPhilosophy...
> 
> The in-kernel documentation describes this well also.
> 
> > "In patch descriptions and in the subject, it is common and preferable to use 
> > present-tense, imperative language. Write as if you are telling git what to do 
> > with your patch.".
> > 
> > It's not my job to accept or reject patches for this subsystem and I don't want 
> > to tell you what to write but, if I were you, I'd send a v2 with a subject like 
> > "Fix misspelled word in comments" (or something else similar to this subject).
> > 
> > Furthermore, please take note that the name of this subsystem is "staging" (it 
> > is not "Staging").
> 
> Either is fine, I will not reject a change for an upper-case letter like
> this.
> 
> > Decide by yourself whether or not the other two patches that you submitted this 
> > morning have to be sent anew as v2 with due changes in the subjects.
> 
> I do not see a problem with this change at all, nothing needs to be
> resubmitted.

You are the maintainer, so it's up to you. Nothing needs to be resubmitted but 
I hope that next time his subjects will better conform to the guidelines.

Thanks,

Fabio

> 
> greg k-h
> 

Re: [PATCH] Staging: r8188eu: core: 'associcated' may be misspelled - perhaps 'associated'?

[Dan Carpenter]

On Tue, Feb 08, 2022 at 09:56:51AM +0100, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> On martedì 8 febbraio 2022 09:26:26 CET Greg KH wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 08, 2022 at 09:09:10AM +0100, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> > > On martedì 8 febbraio 2022 00:42:10 CET Leonardo Araujo wrote:
> > > > This patch fixes the following checkpatch.pl warning:
> > > > 
> > > > CHECK: 'associcated' may be misspelled - perhaps 'associated'?
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Leonardo Araujo <leonardo.aa88@gmail.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_ap.c | 6 +++---
> > > >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > > 
> > > "Staging: r8188eu: core: 'associated' may be misspelled - perhaps 'associated'?" 
> > > it's not the way patch subjects are created for inclusion in Linux.
> > 
> > I do not see anything wrong with this.  What do you think is not
> > acceptable?
> 
> My opinion is that the formal construction of a patch is important not less than
> the code in it. However it's not that big deal, in this case. But for what my 
> opinion is worth, having a subject that says what the patch must do and using an
> imperative language is quite important.

No, the imperative language rule is pointless bureaucracy.  Very few of
us are English majors and a lot speak English as a second language.  Why
put artificial barriers in the way?  You will lose developers like that.

What matters in a commit message is can you understand what the problem
is, how it affects users and how are we going to fix it.

regards,
dan carpenter