Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 19 May 2021 14:44:38 +0200
From:   Fabio Aiuto <fabioaiuto83@gmail.com>
To:     Bryan Brattlof <hello@bryanbrattlof.com>
Cc:     Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
        Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: rtl8723bs: remove if (true) statement
Message-ID: <20210519124438.GA1417@agape.jhs>
References: <20210518144335.1677320-1-hello@bryanbrattlof.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210518144335.1677320-1-hello@bryanbrattlof.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk

Hi Bryan,

On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 02:45:19PM +0000, Bryan Brattlof wrote:
> 'if (true) { ... }' will always evaluate to true. Remove it and
> save a few tabs for somewhere else.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Bryan Brattlof <hello@bryanbrattlof.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_ap.c | 159 ++++++++++++------------
>  1 file changed, 78 insertions(+), 81 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_ap.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_ap.c
> index 9df4476b2e2d..98b1bec67999 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_ap.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_ap.c
> @@ -59,112 +59,109 @@ static void update_BCNTIM(struct adapter *padapter)
>

I was wondering why are you using the first patch of a nine patch
series as a 'cover letter' of an eight patch patchset.

In other words, why putting the In-Reply-To field of all patches subsequent
to the first one ponting to the first patch itself as a cover letter,
is it a recommened practice?

thank you,

fabio