On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 4:26 AM Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@xxxxxx> wrote: > > I prefer that you would put recipient specifications also into the message field “To” > (besides “Cc”). Okay. > > > > Hello, could you review a bug and its fix? > > I suggest to omit such a question from better change descriptions. > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.9-rc5#n45 Thank you. I'll thoroughly read this. > > > … > > To fix this, this patch holds and locks the l2cap channel. > > Please choose a corresponding imperative wording. Okay. > > > You would probably like to improve your patch approach further > so that provided data will be kept consistent. I will. > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240426073142.363876-1-iam@xxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > Regards, > Markus > On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 4:26 AM Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@xxxxxx> wrote: > > I prefer that you would put recipient specifications also into the message field “To” > (besides “Cc”). > > > > Hello, could you review a bug and its fix? > > I suggest to omit such a question from better change descriptions. > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.9-rc5#n45 > > > … > > To fix this, this patch holds and locks the l2cap channel. > > Please choose a corresponding imperative wording. > > > You would probably like to improve your patch approach further > so that provided data will be kept consistent. > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240426073142.363876-1-iam@xxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > Regards, > Markus >
