On Fri, 17 Sep 2021 11:12:45 +0200, FMDF said: > My question is: why "This patch is preparation for _io_ops [future] > structure removal." is good while "Eventually this function will be > deleted but some of the code will be reused later." is not. The first is specific about what is being changed and why, and tells the reviewer what to watch for. Also, the reviewer now knows where to look for justification - there is hopefully a 0/N patch that explains why and how this structure is being removed. The second doesn't say which "this function" is being removed, why this is being done, or whether the changes were internal to the function, or in other functions. It also doesn't explain why or how code will be re-used. The distinction matters, because the biggest point of reviewing is "Does this commit do what was intended?" Answering that question is a lot easier when it's clear what was intended.
Attachment:
pgp2SiY8BV4Gh.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
