Message ID | cover.1597675604.git.helmut.grohne@intenta.de |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | net: dsa: microchip: delete dead code | expand |
On 8/17/2020 7:55 AM, Helmut Grohne wrote: > Andrew Lunn asked me to turn my dead code removal RFC patch into a real > one splitting it per member. This is what this v2 series does. Some > parts of the RFC patch are already applied via: > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=b20a6b29a811bee0e44b64958d415eb50436154c > > All other structure members are read at least once. net-next is currently closed at the moment, and these patches are clearly targeted at that tree: http://vger.kernel.org/~davem/net-next.html Also, please provide a commit message, even if it is only paraphrasing what the subject does. The changes do look good, so once you fix that, we should be good. Thank you
Hi Florian, On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 08:18:41AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote: > net-next is currently closed at the moment, and these patches are clearly > targeted at that tree: I agree that these are clearly net-next material. > http://vger.kernel.org/~davem/net-next.html It says "Come in we're open" for me. Maybe that changed over night and I was just a day early? I'll check this for future submissions. > Also, please provide a commit message, even if it is only paraphrasing what > the subject does. The changes do look good, so once you fix that, we should > be good. I'm all for writing good commit messages and if you look into the few commits I've authored thus far, you see that I usually do explain them in detail. In these cases however, I'm left wondering what value any further explanation would add. Repeating the subject does not make sense to me. I feel that we're overdoing it here and that there are more important aspects to be improved about the driver. I'll be focusing on those. Helmut