[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75VfFZ2bgEqS7cbTfYzxtXk3T5VaoJpum5aiNMpfvhfbuqw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2020 14:06:49 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
Cc: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
Michał Mirosław <mirq-linux@...e.qmqm.pl>,
linux-i2c <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 03/22] i2c: tegra: Clean up messages in the code
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 3:53 AM Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com> wrote:
>
> This patch unifies style of all messages in the driver by starting them
> with a lowercase letter and using consistent capitalization and wording
> for all messages.
I didn't look at the rest (yet) but this series has a patch ordering issue.
Why do we first do some little, non-critical clean ups?
The preferred way is to arrange like:
- fixes that may be backported
- fixes that are likely not going to be backported
- features
- cleanups
In its turn cleanups go by severity:
- code affected ones (and maybe logical changers)
- ...
- commentary / indentation fixes
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists