On Sat, Nov 22, 2025 at 08:58:12PM +0100, Markus Elfring wrote:
…
returned structure, which should be balanced with a corresponding put_device() when the reference is no longer needed.
…
Would a corresponding imperative wording become helpful for an improved change description? https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Docu...
How do you think about to omit an extra check for the variable “err” in the affected if branch because it can always be returned here?
Would it be helpful to append parentheses to the function name in the summary phrase?
Regards, Markus
Hi,
This is the semi-friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman.
Markus, you seem to have sent a nonsensical or otherwise pointless review comment to a patch submission on a Linux kernel developer mailing list. I strongly suggest that you not do this anymore. Please do not bother developers who are actively working to produce patches and features with comments that, in the end, are a waste of time.
Patch submitter, please ignore Markus's suggestion; you do not need to follow it at all. The person/bot/AI that sent it is being ignored by almost all Linux kernel maintainers for having a persistent pattern of behavior of producing distracting and pointless commentary, and inability to adapt to feedback. Please feel free to also ignore emails from them.
thanks,
greg k-h's patch email bot