Fix several cleanup issues reported by checkpatch.pl in module
staging/rtl8192e in file rtllib_rx.c

Khadija Kamran (4):
  staging: rtl8192e: remove extra blank lines
  staging: rtl8192e: add blank lines after declarations
  staging: rtl8192e: add spaces around binary operators
  staging: rtl8192e: remove blank lines after '{'

 drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtllib_rx.c | 73 +++++++++++-----------------
 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-)

--
2.34.1

On Thu, 23 Mar 2023, Khadija Kamran wrote:

> Fix several cleanup issues reported by checkpatch.pl in module
> staging/rtl8192e in file rtllib_rx.c

Why is it resent?

julia

>
> Khadija Kamran (4):
>   staging: rtl8192e: remove extra blank lines
>   staging: rtl8192e: add blank lines after declarations
>   staging: rtl8192e: add spaces around binary operators
>   staging: rtl8192e: remove blank lines after '{'
>
>  drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtllib_rx.c | 73 +++++++++++-----------------
>  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.34.1
>
>
>

On Thu, 23 Mar 2023, Julia Lawall wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, 23 Mar 2023, Khadija Kamran wrote:
>
> > Fix several cleanup issues reported by checkpatch.pl in module
> > staging/rtl8192e in file rtllib_rx.c
>
> Why is it resent?

OK, I see, sorry for the noise.

julia

>
> julia
>
> >
> > Khadija Kamran (4):
> >   staging: rtl8192e: remove extra blank lines
> >   staging: rtl8192e: add blank lines after declarations
> >   staging: rtl8192e: add spaces around binary operators
> >   staging: rtl8192e: remove blank lines after '{'
> >
> >  drivers/staging/rtl8192e/rtllib_rx.c | 73 +++++++++++-----------------
> >  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-)
> >
> > --
> > 2.34.1
> >
> >
> >
>

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 02:08:58PM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, 23 Mar 2023, Julia Lawall wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 23 Mar 2023, Khadija Kamran wrote:
> >
> > > Fix several cleanup issues reported by checkpatch.pl in module
> > > staging/rtl8192e in file rtllib_rx.c
> >
> > Why is it resent?
> 
> OK, I see, sorry for the noise.

I'm still confused...  :P

regards,
dan carpenter

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 04:34:43PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 02:08:58PM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On Thu, 23 Mar 2023, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > 
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, 23 Mar 2023, Khadija Kamran wrote:
> > >
> > > > Fix several cleanup issues reported by checkpatch.pl in module
> > > > staging/rtl8192e in file rtllib_rx.c
> > >
> > > Why is it resent?
> > 
> > OK, I see, sorry for the noise.
> 
> I'm still confused...  :P
>

Hey Dan!

Sorry about the confusion. I sent the last patch with the wrong email
mistakenly. It was causing following warning as reported by Philipp,
Checkpatch:

WARNING: From:/Signed-off-by: email address mismatch: 'From: Khadija
Kamran <kkamran.bese16seecs@seecs.edu.pk>' != 'Signed-off-by: Khadija
Kamran <kamrankhadijadj@gmail.com>

I resent this patch with the correct email address. I hope I did not do
this wrong.

Regards,
Khadija

> regards,
> dan carpenter
>

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 08:23:17PM +0500, Khadija Kamran wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 04:34:43PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 02:08:58PM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Thu, 23 Mar 2023, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > 
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 23 Mar 2023, Khadija Kamran wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Fix several cleanup issues reported by checkpatch.pl in module
> > > > > staging/rtl8192e in file rtllib_rx.c
> > > >
> > > > Why is it resent?
> > > 
> > > OK, I see, sorry for the noise.
> > 
> > I'm still confused...  :P
> >
> 
> Hey Dan!
> 
> Sorry about the confusion. I sent the last patch with the wrong email
> mistakenly. It was causing following warning as reported by Philipp,
> Checkpatch:
> 
> WARNING: From:/Signed-off-by: email address mismatch: 'From: Khadija
> Kamran <kkamran.bese16seecs@seecs.edu.pk>' != 'Signed-off-by: Khadija
> Kamran <kamrankhadijadj@gmail.com>
> 
> I resent this patch with the correct email address. I hope I did not do
> this wrong.

It needs to be v2: resend from the correct email address.

When you send a patch a second time that always needs to be explained
because we don't remember all the email we get.  The v2 information is
really interesting as a reviewer.  Maybe I am wondering, "Did I respond
to the original email and is my complaint fixed?"

For RESEND patches it means that the first patch was perfect but
something broke down in the process.  Maybe a maintainer was on vacation
and accidentally ignored the patch.  If Greg asks you to resend
everything that's a kind of breakdown in the process as well, but just
add that information in the patch "Resending all the most/ patches
because it was confusing which one were supposed to be applied".

That information is super interesting because it shows we are all on the
same page about how to go forward.

regards,
dan carpenter

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 06:32:54PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 08:23:17PM +0500, Khadija Kamran wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 04:34:43PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 02:08:58PM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > On Thu, 23 Mar 2023, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 23 Mar 2023, Khadija Kamran wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Fix several cleanup issues reported by checkpatch.pl in module
> > > > > > staging/rtl8192e in file rtllib_rx.c
> > > > >
> > > > > Why is it resent?
> > > > 
> > > > OK, I see, sorry for the noise.
> > > 
> > > I'm still confused...  :P
> > >
> > 
> > Hey Dan!
> > 
> > Sorry about the confusion. I sent the last patch with the wrong email
> > mistakenly. It was causing following warning as reported by Philipp,
> > Checkpatch:
> > 
> > WARNING: From:/Signed-off-by: email address mismatch: 'From: Khadija
> > Kamran <kkamran.bese16seecs@seecs.edu.pk>' != 'Signed-off-by: Khadija
> > Kamran <kamrankhadijadj@gmail.com>
> > 
> > I resent this patch with the correct email address. I hope I did not do
> > this wrong.
> 
> It needs to be v2: resend from the correct email address.
> 
> When you send a patch a second time that always needs to be explained
> because we don't remember all the email we get.  The v2 information is
> really interesting as a reviewer.  Maybe I am wondering, "Did I respond
> to the original email and is my complaint fixed?"
> 
> For RESEND patches it means that the first patch was perfect but
> something broke down in the process.  Maybe a maintainer was on vacation
> and accidentally ignored the patch.  If Greg asks you to resend
> everything that's a kind of breakdown in the process as well, but just
> add that information in the patch "Resending all the most/ patches
> because it was confusing which one were supposed to be applied".
> 
> That information is super interesting because it shows we are all on the
> same page about how to go forward.
>

Hey Dan,

Thank you for the explanation. I understand and I will make sure to
always add some information regarding the patch if resent.

Regards,
Khadija

> regards,
> dan carpenter

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 08:23:17PM +0500, Khadija Kamran wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 04:34:43PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 02:08:58PM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Thu, 23 Mar 2023, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > 
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 23 Mar 2023, Khadija Kamran wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Fix several cleanup issues reported by checkpatch.pl in module
> > > > > staging/rtl8192e in file rtllib_rx.c
> > > >
> > > > Why is it resent?
> > > 
> > > OK, I see, sorry for the noise.
> > 
> > I'm still confused...  :P
> >
> 
> Hey Dan!
> 
> Sorry about the confusion. I sent the last patch with the wrong email
> mistakenly. It was causing following warning as reported by Philipp,
> Checkpatch:
> 
> WARNING: From:/Signed-off-by: email address mismatch: 'From: Khadija
> Kamran <kkamran.bese16seecs@seecs.edu.pk>' != 'Signed-off-by: Khadija
> Kamran <kamrankhadijadj@gmail.com>
> 
> I resent this patch with the correct email address. I hope I did not do
> this wrong.

That would be a totally new version, as something changed, so document
it, otherwise we are confused.

thanks,

greg k-h