Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3]ipmi:bt-bmc:Avoid unnecessary judgement
To:     minyard@acm.org
Cc:     arnd@arndb.de, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
        openipmi-developer@lists.sourceforge.net,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20200408115958.2848-1-tangbin@cmss.chinamobile.com>
 <20200413113225.GB3587@minyard.net>
From:   Tang Bin <tangbin@cmss.chinamobile.com>
Message-ID: <47c06465-9ae5-42c2-ca00-5c666521bbde@cmss.chinamobile.com>
Date:   Mon, 13 Apr 2020 19:56:44 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200413113225.GB3587@minyard.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi, Corey:

On 2020/4/13 19:32, Corey Minyard wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 08, 2020 at 07:59:58PM +0800, Tang Bin wrote:
>> bt_bmc_probe() is only called with an openfirmware platform device.
>> Therefore there is no need to check that the passed in device is NULL or
>> that it has an openfirmware node.
> I waited until after the merge window closed, this is queued for 5.8.
Can I consider that the patch will be applied in 5.8？
>   I
> changed the title to be "Avoid unnecessary check".
You have modified it, which means I don't need to submit a new patch？
>   "Judgement",
> although technically correct, has a legal or moral connotation.

I'm sorry, I won't use that word again.


Thanks for your instruction.

Tang Bin

>