linux-kernel - Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH] Staging: rtl8723bs: rtw

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]

Date:   Thu, 12 Mar 2020 09:31:33 -0700
From:   Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@...ux.microsoft.com>
To:     Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...ia.fr>,
        Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@...hat.com>
Cc:     Shreeya Patel <shreeya.patel23498@...il.com>,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, outreachy-kernel@...glegroups.com,
        daniel.baluta@...il.com, hverkuil@...all.nl,
        Larry.Finger@...inger.net
Subject: Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH] Staging: rtl8723bs: rtw_mlme: Remove
 unnecessary conditions

On 3/12/2020 3:49 AM, Julia Lawall wrote:

Thanks for your input Julia and Stefano.

>> 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.
> 
> https://kernelnewbies.org/PatchPhilosophy suggests:
> 
> 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.

Use of imperative language is the approach I was thinking as well.

thanks,
  -lakshmi