On 2021/11/09 13:01, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Tue, Nov 09, 2021 at 12:51:39PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
I'm fine with this. Barring any objection, I will commit the patch.
I have to admit that the timing is kind of odd, or strange, or both,
because I was just going through my backlog from
On Tue, Nov 09, 2021 at 12:51:39PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> I'm fine with this. Barring any objection, I will commit the patch.
I have to admit that the timing is kind of odd, or strange, or both,
because I was just going through my backlog from -hackers, and just
bumped on this thread like 15
On 2021/11/05 14:52, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
Hi,
I see that "procsignal" and "ProcSignal" are being used in the code
comments which look inconsistent. IMO, "ProcSignal" is the right word
to use and let's be consistent across the code comments. Attaching a
tiny patch for that.
Thoughts?
I'
Hi,
I see that "procsignal" and "ProcSignal" are being used in the code
comments which look inconsistent. IMO, "ProcSignal" is the right word
to use and let's be consistent across the code comments. Attaching a
tiny patch for that.
Thoughts?
Regards,
Bharath Rupireddy.
v1-0001-consistently-use
