Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 6 Sep 2022 09:21:11 +0700
From:   Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>
To:     Charles Mirabile <cmirabil@redhat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@gmail.com>,
        Serge Schneider <serge@raspberrypi.org>,
        Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@i2se.com>,
        Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nicolassaenzj@gmail.com>,
        Mattias Brugger <mbrugger@suse.com>,
        linux-rpi-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, rh-kdlp@googlegroups.com,
        Joel Slebodnick <jslebodn@redhat.com>,
        Joel Savitz <jsavitz@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 0/6] Raspberry Pi Sense HAT driver
Message-ID: <Yxaul73DR7BVT7/C@debian.me>
References: <20220823174158.45579-1-cmirabil@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="0d7ie7tAKFEy7O0I"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220823174158.45579-1-cmirabil@redhat.com>
Precedence: bulk


--0d7ie7tAKFEy7O0I
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 01:41:53PM -0400, Charles Mirabile wrote:
> This patch series adds a set of drivers for operating the Sense HAT
> peripheral device. This board is an add on for the Raspberry Pi that is
> designed to connect using the GPIO connector and communicate via I2C.
>=20

Better say "Add a set of drivers for Sense HAT peripheral add-on device
for Raspberry Pi. The device is connected using GPIO connector and
communicate via I2C".

> This is a refactor of the work of Serge Schneider, the author of a
> version of this driver that is currently in the Raspberry Pi downstream
> kernel. We modified his code to make it suitable for upstream Linux.
>=20

s/We modified his code/The driver code is modified/

Also, I see that description of individual patches is written in
descriptive mood. However, it is preferable to write in imperative
instead (see "Describe your changes" in
Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst). The specific suggested
wordings are in reply to each patch.

Thanks.

--=20
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara

--0d7ie7tAKFEy7O0I
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iHUEABYIAB0WIQSSYQ6Cy7oyFNCHrUH2uYlJVVFOowUCYxaujgAKCRD2uYlJVVFO
o/KVAQD5X62mGGJfyokbCip9gU9D0JaVjC8Fv8RYHyhdNzTrGQEAmYIRyFqqj7T3
L4QZk//cVLDCmpu8jgI4FMM3a2XAiwQ=
=/4Ra
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--0d7ie7tAKFEy7O0I--