[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87r1y0nwip.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 15:56:46 +0200
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
To: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Daniel Drake <dsd@...too.org>,
Ulrich Kunitz <kune@...ne-taler.de>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jes.Sorensen@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] zd1211rw/zd_usb.h: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member
+ jes
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com> writes:
> Hi,
>
> On 3/5/20 10:10, Kalle Valo wrote:
>> Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Thu, 2020-03-05 at 16:50 +0200, Kalle Valo wrote:
>>>> "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com> writes:
>>> []
>>>>> drivers/net/wireless/zydas/zd1211rw/zd_usb.h | 8 ++++----
>>>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> "zd1211rw: " is enough, no need to have the filename in the title.
>>
>>>> But I asked this already in an earlier patch, who prefers this format?
>>>> It already got opposition so I'm not sure what to do.
>>>
>>> I think it doesn't matter.
>>>
>>> Trivial inconsistencies in patch subject and word choice
>>> don't have much overall impact.
>>
>> I wrote in a confusing way, my question above was about the actual patch
>> and not the the title. For example, Jes didn't like this style change:
>>
>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11402315/
>>
>
> It doesn't seem that that comment adds a lot to the conversation. The only
> thing that it says is literally "fix the compiler". By the way, more than
> a hundred patches have already been applied to linux-next[1] and he seems
> to be the only person that has commented such a thing.
But I also asked who prefers this format in that thread, you should not
ignore questions from two maintainers (me and Jes).
> Qemu guys are adopting this format, too[2][3].
>
> On the other hand, the changelog text explains the reasons why we are
> implementing this change all across the kernel tree. :)
>
> [1]
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/log/?qt=grep&q=flexible-array
> [2] https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-s390x/2020-03/msg00019.html
> [3] https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-s390x/2020-03/msg00020.html
TBH I was leaning more on Jes side on this, but I guess these patches
are ok if they are so widely accepted. Unless anyone objects?
--
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
Powered by blists - more mailing lists