Re: [PATCH v2] staging: rtl8192u: Align descendant arguments

[Julia Lawall]

On Sun, 15 Oct 2023, Andi Shyti wrote:

> Hi Gilbert,
>
> On Sun, Oct 15, 2023 at 09:22:58AM +0100, Gilbert Adikankwu wrote:
> > Adhere to Linux kernel coding style.
> >
> > "...A very commonly used style is to align descendants to a function
> > open parenthesis" - (Excerpted from Linux kernel coding style (#2))
> >
> > Reported by checkpatch:
> >
> > CHECK: Alignment should match open parenthesis
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Gilbert Adikankwu <gilbertadikankwu@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> I don't like this commit message. Although it's correctly
> written, I think it can be improved in order to be more
> immediately understandable.
>
> Write what you did in imperative form:
>
> "Adhere to Linux kernel coding style" doesn't mean much, you can
> write
>
>   Align descendant argument to the open parenthesis as per the
>   "Linux kernel coding style" in
>   Documentation/process/coding-style.rst.
>
> Yuo tell immediately what you did and where to find the
> reference. Citing the document in the commit log, in this case,
> looks to me like an unnecessary information.
>
> Copy pasting the output of the error is a very good practice and
> you can write it as:
>
>   Mute the following checkpatch error:
>
>     CHECK: Alignment should match open parenthesis

In this case, it seems fine, but some of the checkpatch messages are a bit
verbose, and anyway the specific fix is a bit different than the
checkpatch message, so you can use your judgement about this.

julia

>
> > ---
> > v2: In the first patch I changed my commit title in the
> > email and sent it before amending it in my git tree which then changed
> > its SHA ID. I felt it might cause an issue so that is why I did a v2
> > of the patch.
>
> It's not an issue, you can do that.
>
> But I'm going to give you another piece of advice that I already
> gave in this list. Do not send patches between versions too fast.
> Reviewers need some time to review... wait some time before
> sending the v2, so that the v1 gets enough visibility. Sometimes
> reviewers correct each other, but they need time to read the
> e-mails.
>
> This way you would also avoid unnecessary noise.
>
> Andi
>
>