[PATCH] net: wireless: ralink: rt2x00: "foo* bar" should be "foo *bar"

[PATCH] net: wireless: ralink: rt2x00: "foo* bar" should be "foo *bar"

[hanyu001]

Fix checkpatch warnings:

./drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2x00.h:386: ERROR: "foo* bar" 
should be "foo *bar"
./drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2x00.h:513: ERROR: "foo* bar" 
should be "foo *bar"

Signed-off-by: Yu Han <hanyu001@208suo.com>
---
  drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2x00.h | 4 ++--
  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2x00.h 
b/drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2x00.h
index 07a6a5a..c883d7f 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2x00.h
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2x00.h
@@ -383,7 +383,7 @@ struct rt2x00_intf {
      atomic_t seqno;
  };

-static inline struct rt2x00_intf* vif_to_intf(struct ieee80211_vif 
*vif)
+static inline struct rt2x00_intf *vif_to_intf(struct ieee80211_vif 
*vif)
  {
      return (struct rt2x00_intf *)vif->drv_priv;
  }
@@ -510,7 +510,7 @@ struct rt2x00_sta {
      int wcid;
  };

-static inline struct rt2x00_sta* sta_to_rt2x00_sta(struct ieee80211_sta 
*sta)
+static inline struct rt2x00_sta *sta_to_rt2x00_sta(struct ieee80211_sta 
*sta)
  {
      return (struct rt2x00_sta *)sta->drv_priv;
  }

Re: [PATCH] net: wireless: ralink: rt2x00: "foo* bar" should be "foo *bar"

[Johannes Berg]

On Fri, 2023-07-21 at 14:34 +0800, hanyu001@208suo.com wrote:
> Fix checkpatch warnings:
> 
> ./drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2x00.h:386: ERROR: "foo* bar" 
> should be "foo *bar"
> ./drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2x00.h:513: ERROR: "foo* bar" 
> should be "foo *bar"
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yu Han <hanyu001@208suo.com>

This patch is broken. I'll just point you to what I wrote before:

https://lore.kernel.org/all/058dd31ef48495f8641f5b66839aaea039af0f08.camel@sipsolutions.net/

What _are_ you trying to achieve?!

Currently all you're achieving is annoying everyone with broken (and
pointless submissions).

johannes

Re: [PATCH] net: wireless: ralink: rt2x00: "foo* bar" should be "foo *bar"

[Johannes Berg]

On Tue, 2023-08-08 at 10:34 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Fri, 2023-07-21 at 14:34 +0800, hanyu001@208suo.com wrote:
> > Fix checkpatch warnings:
> > 
> > ./drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2x00.h:386: ERROR: "foo* bar" 
> > should be "foo *bar"
> > ./drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2x00.h:513: ERROR: "foo* bar" 
> > should be "foo *bar"
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Yu Han <hanyu001@208suo.com>
> 
> This patch is broken. I'll just point you to what I wrote before:
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/058dd31ef48495f8641f5b66839aaea039af0f08.camel@sipsolutions.net/
> 
> What _are_ you trying to achieve?!
> 
> Currently all you're achieving is annoying everyone with broken (and
> pointless submissions).
> 

And the email address doesn't even work, only about two weeks after you
sent this patch?

  hanyu001@208suo.com
    host mx1.qiye.aliyun.com [47.246.146.58]
    SMTP error from remote mail server after RCPT TO:<hanyu001@208suo.com>:
    554 RCPT (hanyu001@208suo.com) dosn't exist

johannes

Re: [PATCH] net: wireless: ralink: rt2x00: "foo* bar" should be "foo *bar"

[Bagas Sanjaya]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1399 bytes --]

On Tue, Aug 08, 2023 at 10:40:53AM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Tue, 2023-08-08 at 10:34 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > On Fri, 2023-07-21 at 14:34 +0800, hanyu001@208suo.com wrote:
> > > Fix checkpatch warnings:
> > > 
> > > ./drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2x00.h:386: ERROR: "foo* bar" 
> > > should be "foo *bar"
> > > ./drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2x00.h:513: ERROR: "foo* bar" 
> > > should be "foo *bar"
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Yu Han <hanyu001@208suo.com>
> > 
> > This patch is broken. I'll just point you to what I wrote before:
> > 
> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/058dd31ef48495f8641f5b66839aaea039af0f08.camel@sipsolutions.net/
> > 
> > What _are_ you trying to achieve?!
> > 
> > Currently all you're achieving is annoying everyone with broken (and
> > pointless submissions).
> > 
> 
> And the email address doesn't even work, only about two weeks after you
> sent this patch?
> 
>   hanyu001@208suo.com
>     host mx1.qiye.aliyun.com [47.246.146.58]
>     SMTP error from remote mail server after RCPT TO:<hanyu001@208suo.com>:
>     554 RCPT (hanyu001@208suo.com) dosn't exist
> 

No wonder why @208suo.com people ignore reviews from mailing list - their
addresses are send-only without real mailboxes...

BTW, how can you get above error message? I'm curious.

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

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] net: wireless: ralink: rt2x00: "foo* bar" should be "foo *bar"

[Johannes Berg]

On Thu, 2023-08-10 at 09:10 +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> > And the email address doesn't even work, only about two weeks after you
> > sent this patch?
> > 
> >   hanyu001@208suo.com
> >     host mx1.qiye.aliyun.com [47.246.146.58]
> >     SMTP error from remote mail server after RCPT TO:<hanyu001@208suo.com>:
> >     554 RCPT (hanyu001@208suo.com) dosn't exist
> > 
> 
> No wonder why @208suo.com people ignore reviews from mailing list - their
> addresses are send-only without real mailboxes...
> 
> BTW, how can you get above error message? I'm curious.

That was just the error message I got back from my mail server,
presumably now that you actually tried emailing them, you also got one.

I'm beginning to think we should just block that whole domain until
someone there is actually willing to _interact_, not just throw
(garbage!) patches over the fence.

johannes

Re: [PATCH] net: wireless: ralink: rt2x00: "foo* bar" should be "foo *bar"

[Bagas Sanjaya]

On 10/08/2023 13:53, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-08-10 at 09:10 +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
>>> And the email address doesn't even work, only about two weeks after you
>>> sent this patch?
>>>
>>>   hanyu001@208suo.com
>>>     host mx1.qiye.aliyun.com [47.246.146.58]
>>>     SMTP error from remote mail server after RCPT TO:<hanyu001@208suo.com>:
>>>     554 RCPT (hanyu001@208suo.com) dosn't exist
>>>
>>
>> No wonder why @208suo.com people ignore reviews from mailing list - their
>> addresses are send-only without real mailboxes...
>>
>> BTW, how can you get above error message? I'm curious.
> 
> That was just the error message I got back from my mail server,
> presumably now that you actually tried emailing them, you also got one.
> 

Ack, I also got above delivery failure notification, hence removing
Yu Han from address list.

> I'm beginning to think we should just block that whole domain until
> someone there is actually willing to _interact_, not just throw
> (garbage!) patches over the fence.
> 

Ack too! I'm leaning towards blocking for sanity of myself and
mailing lists. IMO, we should have done the same against @cdjrlc.com
addresses when they sent spelling fixes that are 50-50 correct but
they also ignored change-requested reviews.

Thanks!

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