On Mon, 15 Aug 2016, Vegard Nossum wrote: > On 15 August 2016 at 13:12, SF Markus Elfring > <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > From: Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:03:29 +0200 > > > > The field "owner" is set by core. Thus delete an extra initialisation. > > Hi, > > Just a small nit on the patch title: "delete owner assignment" is > virtually useless as a title because it has no meaning without the > broader context and only describes the literal change. It's like > naming a patch "add a line" or "change the code"; it serves no > purpose. > > How about "backlight-tosa: delete _unnecessary_ assignment"? This > immediately communicates the reason for/intent of the patch (there is > unnecessary code, thus we can simplify it). backlight-tosa: Do not manually assign THIS_MODULE to .owner This is unnecessary because ... > (Sorry about singling out this patch and the apparent bikeshedding, > this comment obviously applies to a lot of patches by a lot of > authors!) > > Thanks, > > > Vegard -- Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog -- 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
