linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] lp3971: remove unnecessary ret value checking in lp3971_i2c

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20100805144336.GA26801@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Date:	Thu, 5 Aug 2010 15:43:36 +0100
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To:	Axel Lin <axel.lin@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Liam Girdwood <lrg@...mlogic.co.uk>,
	Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
	Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] lp3971: remove unnecessary ret value checking in
	lp3971_i2c_write()

On Thu, Aug 05, 2010 at 10:22:13PM +0800, Axel Lin wrote:
> 2010/8/5 Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>:

> > but can I once more renew my request that you make some effort to
> > provide subject lines for your patches which are consistent with the
> > standard used for the area of the kernel you're submitting to?

> I think we have communication problem.
> I thought the subject "[PATCH 1/2] lp3971: remove unnecessary ret
> value checking in lp3971_i2c_write()"
> is pretty clear.
> Or do you mean something else?

In this case pretty much every regulator API patch has a subject line
starting "regulator: " but none of your patches do this, you have
created your own style which you use over all your patches.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/