From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90E3DC4332B for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 23:36:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C70120768 for ; Wed, 18 Mar 2020 23:36:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ellerman.id.au header.i=@ellerman.id.au header.b="Y3qHO+96" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727020AbgCRXgZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Mar 2020 19:36:25 -0400 Received: from ozlabs.org ([203.11.71.1]:37095 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726647AbgCRXgZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Mar 2020 19:36:25 -0400 Received: from authenticated.ozlabs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 48jRJ617n2z9sPF; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 10:36:21 +1100 (AEDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ellerman.id.au; s=201909; t=1584574582; bh=1wPd69g706f1HjFfq9A1c68BcRSf6tB8V7w5oED57sM=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=Y3qHO+96wskzfknqGg/UlEnfIqCdso3oDbRgMS0Dac4PRP15nGV4cX6mlLOSw2rzY AysVFPwCCecrESjxP0uFDE36gveIubypVLh6FtB0HfzfLd8yxnFwiPXHkkBjFtKqIn bLUHjitp5jZomJ2w709RjolUQ3BUd7a+jJaMWVfdhvlK2KXxTqD0qz4gEMZeR5u19B +sDUVcHtt38CupYOthm7diYgSoRJFk/+h78MgrnHIyM0idckC92+y0MaZ8/cntNOoP V9dMzkAAGi/04pQxC4UKnXS+iKcuyUvpNUSCqA8qRWCPRpvSjXc1IA9DCZsTfYD1rS S8bQh6px1tAkA== From: Michael Ellerman To: Segher Boessenkool , Christophe Leroy Cc: Ravi Bangoria , mikey@neuling.org, apopple@linux.ibm.com, peterz@infradead.org, fweisbec@gmail.com, oleg@redhat.com, npiggin@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, paulus@samba.org, jolsa@kernel.org, naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, mingo@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/15] powerpc/watchpoint: Prepare handler to handle more than one watcnhpoint In-Reply-To: <20200318212726.GN22482@gate.crashing.org> References: <20200309085806.155823-1-ravi.bangoria@linux.ibm.com> <20200309085806.155823-13-ravi.bangoria@linux.ibm.com> <3ba94856-0d87-5046-eca9-b5c3d99ec654@c-s.fr> <87zhcdevz7.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> <20200318212726.GN22482@gate.crashing.org> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 10:36:22 +1100 Message-ID: <87wo7hdymh.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Segher Boessenkool writes: > On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 12:44:52PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote: >> Le 18/03/2020 =C3=A0 12:35, Michael Ellerman a =C3=A9crit=C2=A0: >> >Christophe Leroy writes: >> >>Le 09/03/2020 =C3=A0 09:58, Ravi Bangoria a =C3=A9crit=C2=A0: >> >>>Currently we assume that we have only one watchpoint supported by hw. >> >>>Get rid of that assumption and use dynamic loop instead. This should >> >>>make supporting more watchpoints very easy. >> >> >> >>I think using 'we' is to be avoided in commit message. >> > >> >Hmm, is it? >> > >> >I use 'we' all the time. Which doesn't mean it's correct, but I think it >> >reads OK. >> > >> >cheers >>=20 >> From=20 >> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html : >>=20 >> Describe your changes in imperative mood, e.g. =E2=80=9Cmake xyzzy do fr= otz=E2=80=9D=20 >> instead of =E2=80=9C[This patch] makes xyzzy do frotz=E2=80=9D or =E2=80= =9C[I] changed xyzzy=20 >> to do frotz=E2=80=9D, as if you are giving orders to the codebase to cha= nge its=20 >> behaviour. > > That is what is there already? "Get rid of ...". > > You cannot describe the current situation with an imperative. Yeah, I think the use of 'we' and the imperative mood are separate things. ie. this uses 'we' to describe the current behaviour and then the imperative mood to describe the change that's being made: Currently we assume xyzzy always does bar, which is incorrect. Change it to do frotz. cheers