> The subject format is wrong Which format do you expect? > and the summary itself isn't very informative. Which wording do you find more useful? >> From: Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 13:56:42 +0100 > > This patch format is wrong, You might find the use of additional fields in the message body unusual. I have got an other impression from the canonical patch format. > please consider using `git format-patch` and `git send-email`. Thanks for your suggestion. >> The platform_device_put() function was called in one case by the >> add_child() function during error handling even if the passed >> variable "pdev" contained a null pointer. >> >> Implementation details could be improved by the adjustment of jump targets >> according to the Linux coding style convention. I am going to integrate the source code changes that you requested a bit later. >> +report_failure: >> + dev_err(&client->dev, "can't add %s dev\n", name); > > This isn't a very friendly error message. Better to convert the > dev_dbg() calls to dev_err() and tell the user what the problem was. Which information display would be more appropriate here? Regards, Markus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
