[PATCH 11/11] i2c-core: Fix typo in comment

[PATCH 11/11] i2c-core: Fix typo in comment

[Shailendra Verma]

Signed-off-by: Shailendra Verma <shailendra.capricorn@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c |    2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c
index 987c124..c40141b 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c
@@ -1673,7 +1673,7 @@ void i2c_del_adapter(struct i2c_adapter *adap)
 	 * FIXME: This is old code and should ideally be replaced by an
 	 * alternative which results in decoupling the lifetime of the struct
 	 * device from the i2c_adapter, like spi or netdev do. Any solution
-	 * should be throughly tested with DEBUG_KOBJECT_RELEASE enabled!
+	 * should be thoroughly tested with DEBUG_KOBJECT_RELEASE enabled!
 	 */
 	init_completion(&adap->dev_released);
 	device_unregister(&adap->dev);
-- 
1.7.9.5

Re: [PATCH 11/11] i2c-core: Fix typo in comment

[Sudip Mukherjee]

On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 10:24:01PM +0530, Shailendra Verma wrote:
> 
this patch is 11/11 , but I can not see your remaining 1/11 to 10/11
patches. have you posted them yet?

regards
sudip
> Signed-off-by: Shailendra Verma <shailendra.capricorn@gmail.com>
> ---

Re: [PATCH 11/11] i2c-core: Fix typo in comment

[Sudip Mukherjee]

On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 10:31:36AM +0530, Shailendra Verma wrote:
> Hello Sudip,
> 
> Those were my older patches in different module and I had posted them
> already.
Hi,
You do not need to mention the count of your older patches here.
When you mentioned 11/11, it meant your current submission is a patchset
of 11 patches. So when the maintainer decides to apply your patch he will
search your remaining 10 patches because he needs to apply them in series.

regards
sudip

> 

Re: [PATCH 11/11] i2c-core: Fix typo in comment

[Wolfram Sang]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 560 bytes --]

On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 11:25:08AM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:

> You do not need to mention the count of your older patches here.

While technically true...

> When you mentioned 11/11, it meant your current submission is a patchset
> of 11 patches. So when the maintainer decides to apply your patch he will
> search your remaining 10 patches because he needs to apply them in series.

... this doesn't matter much for such cleanup series. They obviously
have no dependency and I assume that the other patches are for other
subsystems. This is fine, too.


[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 11/11] i2c-core: Fix typo in comment

[Sudip Mukherjee]

On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 08:20:47AM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 11:25:08AM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> 
> > You do not need to mention the count of your older patches here.
> 
> While technically true...
> 
> > When you mentioned 11/11, it meant your current submission is a patchset
> > of 11 patches. So when the maintainer decides to apply your patch he will
> > search your remaining 10 patches because he needs to apply them in series.
> 
> ... this doesn't matter much for such cleanup series. They obviously
> have no dependency and I assume that the other patches are for other
> subsystems. This is fine, too.
yes, I also asssumed the same. But it turned out that he has sent 10/10
on 15th May, and then 11/11 , 12/12 , 13/13 and 14/14 on May 18th.

So I assumed that it is a wrong setting while creating his patch.
isn't it?

regards
sudip

Re: [PATCH 11/11] i2c-core: Fix typo in comment

[Wolfram Sang]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 173 bytes --]

On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 10:24:01PM +0530, Shailendra Verma wrote:
> 
> Signed-off-by: Shailendra Verma <shailendra.capricorn@gmail.com>

Applied to for-next, thanks!


[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]