<br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Fri, Sep 30, 2016, 1:22 PM <<a href="mailto:Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu">Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Fri, 30 Sep 2016 07:49:50 +0200, Bjørn Mork said:<br>
<br>
> 1) There should be *some* body text describing the patch, even for a very<br>
> basic change which is explained in full in subject. This goes first<br>
> in the body, separated from the tags with a single empty line.<br>
<br>
And to add to what he said:<br>
<br>
Explaining the *why* is better than the *how*.<br>
<br>
"Add Documentation/initest.txt" isn't that helpful - we can see from the diff<br>
that's what it does. "Add documentation explaining how to deal with the<br>
Frobnizz 3000's wonky interrupts" is a lot better.<br>
<br>
Similarly, "fix off-by-one error" is OK - but extending it to "fix off-by-one<br>
error that causes the wireless card to select the wrong channel" is a lot better.<br>
<br>
Sell us that patch - tell us *why* we want it in the kernel, and why we should<br>
spend time reviewing it....<br>
<br>
</blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Please, you should not bother to review this patch seriously. As I have written in</blockquote></div><div>this patch that "this patch is a test patch", not real one. It has been answered by Mr. Bjorn Mork</div><div>and you. This patch was merely to check whether my patch format is acceptable to the kernel</div><div>community.</div><div class="gmail_quote"></div><div dir="ltr">-- <br></div><div data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><p dir="ltr">Regards,<br>
Amit Kumar<br>
Twitter: @freeark1<br>
Only Numbers Can Command.</p>
</div>