On Tue, 2012-05-22 at 13:15 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 21 May 2012 10:35:36 -0400 > Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Subject: [PATCH] [SCSI] ufs: fix potential NULL pointer dereferencing error in ufshcd_probe. > > Nit: conventionally, the text inside [] is to be discarded by the patch > recipient, so the title of this patch is > > ufs: fix potential NULL pointer dereferencing error in ufshcd_probe. > > which makes it look like a patch against fs/ufs/! > > There is a fashion lately of people prefixing patch titles along the > lines of > > scsi: ufs: fix potential NULL pointer dereferencing error in ufshcd_probe. > > or even > > drivers: scsi: ufs: fix potential NULL pointer dereferencing error in ufshcd_probe. > > that's nuts, and I regularly turn this into a proper pathname - why > not? > > drivers/scsi/ufs: fix potential NULL pointer dereferencing error in ufshcd_probe. Because it's a question of who has to mangle the patch title. If it's the latter, it's me. The [SCSI] tree tag I use implies we're in driver/scsi, so I only add extra bits if we move outside that. James -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
