Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1361293 > unrolled thread

[PATCH] staging: rtl8712: Removed FSF address warning

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

Contents

  [PATCH] staging: rtl8712: Removed FSF address warning Parth Sane <laerdevstudios@gmail.com> - 2016-03-20 15:10 +0100
    Re: [PATCH] staging: rtl8712: Removed FSF address warning Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net> - 2016-03-20 15:30 +0100
      Re: [PATCH] staging: rtl8712: Removed FSF address warning Parth Sane <laerdevstudios@gmail.com> - 2016-03-20 16:00 +0100

#1361293 — [PATCH] staging: rtl8712: Removed FSF address warning

Removed checkpatch warning caused by FSF address block
Signed-off-by: Parth Sane <laerdevstudios@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/staging/rtl8712/hal_init.c | 4 ----
 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8712/hal_init.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8712/hal_init.c
index 8008efe..225ef37 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/rtl8712/hal_init.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8712/hal_init.c
@@ -13,10 +13,6 @@
  * FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the GNU General Public License for
  * more details.
  *
- * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License along with
- * this program; if not, write to the Free Software Foundation, Inc.,
- * 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110, USA
- *
  * Modifications for inclusion into the Linux staging tree are
  * Copyright(c) 2010 Larry Finger. All rights reserved.
  *
-- 
1.9.1

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1361299

On 03/20/2016 08:59 AM, Parth Sane wrote:
> Removed checkpatch warning caused by FSF address block
> Signed-off-by: Parth Sane <laerdevstudios@gmail.com>
> ---
>   drivers/staging/rtl8712/hal_init.c | 4 ----
>   1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)

Now you have at least 3 different patches all with the same subject! How is the 
maintainer supposed to keep them separate? Patchworks will replace each of them 
with the next one having the same title.

A better way would be to create a multiple-part set of patches with the subject 
containing the name of the file being "fixed".

Note that this warning was added to checkpatch.pl well after the driver was 
added to the staging tree. In fact, if this warning had been present then, the 
FSF address would have been removed.

I consider this type of patch to be of minimal value; however, if you do not 
remove this warning, then someone else will. Thus, you should repackage these 
changes. By my count, there are 94 files containing this information. Dropping 
them as one set of patches might be too many at once. I would split them into 
groups of 13 files in one batch, 14 in the next, then 15, 16, 17, and finally 
19, then each group will also be distinguishable.

If GregKH wants it done differently, he will let us know.

Larry

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1361304

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

> On 20-Mar-2016, at 7:56 PM, Larry Finger <larry.finger@lwfinger.net> wrote:
> 
> On 03/20/2016 08:59 AM, Parth Sane wrote:
>> Removed checkpatch warning caused by FSF address block
>> Signed-off-by: Parth Sane <laerdevstudios@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/staging/rtl8712/hal_init.c | 4 ----
>>  1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
> 
> Now you have at least 3 different patches all with the same subject! How is the maintainer supposed to keep them separate? Patchworks will replace each of them with the next one having the same title.
> 
> A better way would be to create a multiple-part set of patches with the subject containing the name of the file being "fixed".
> 
> Note that this warning was added to checkpatch.pl well after the driver was added to the staging tree. In fact, if this warning had been present then, the FSF address would have been removed.
> 
> I consider this type of patch to be of minimal value; however, if you do not remove this warning, then someone else will. Thus, you should repackage these changes. By my count, there are 94 files containing this information. Dropping them as one set of patches might be too many at once. I would split them into groups of 13 files in one batch, 14 in the next, then 15, 16, 17, and finally 19, then each group will also be distinguishable.
> 
> If GregKH wants it done differently, he will let us know.
> 
> Larry
> 
Hi,
It has been pointed out to me that I should send patch sets. I will be doing so. So please ignore the earlier sent patches except the parenthesis patch.
Its been a pleasure to work with such a helpful community and hope to do do more in the future.
Regards,
Parth Sane

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web