[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200602183644.GI5684@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2020 19:36:44 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
Cc: Navid Emamdoost <navid.emamdoost@...il.com>,
linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, Navid Emamdoost <emamd001@....edu>,
Kangjie Lu <kjlu@....edu>, Stephen McCamant <smccaman@....edu>,
Qiushi Wu <wu000273@....edu>,
Dinghao Liu <dinghao.liu@....edu.cn>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: spi: spi-ti-qspi: call pm_runtime_put on pm_runtime_get failure
On Tue, Jun 02, 2020 at 05:05:18PM +0200, Markus Elfring wrote:
> >> I find this commit message improvable also according to Linux software
> >> development documentation.
> > Causing people to send out new versions of things for tweaks to the
> > commit log consumes time for them and everyone they're sending changes to.
> Improving patches (besides source code adjustments) is an usual software
> development activity, isn't it?
Your updates were not improvements. The formatting was worse and to my
native speaker eyes the grammar was worse. With this sort of stylistic
thing it's especially important that any review aligns with the needs
and practices of the subsystem, there is opinion in there and multiple
opinions just makes things harder for submitters.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists