Hi Steve, Thanks for the explanation. I will take care of your comments and send v2 of the same patch.
Thanks, Soumya. -----Original Message----- From: Steven Rostedt [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 6:41 PM To: N, Soumya P <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [PATCH] ftrace: As disabling interrupts is costly and write_lock variant of tasklist_lock is not held from interrupt context it is not necessary to disable interrupts. On Thu, 19 May 2016 08:53:17 +0000 "N, Soumya P" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Steve, > > Could you please explain what this error means? > Is it related to length of subject? > I have run checkpatch.pl on patch and didn't show any error. > > Thanks, > Soumya. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven Rostedt [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 1:25 AM > To: N, Soumya P <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [PATCH] ftrace: As disabling interrupts is costly and write_lock > variant of tasklist_lock is not held from interrupt context it is not > necessary to disable interrupts. > > > -ERUNONSUBJECT A subject (and this includes normal net etiquette as well) should be a short description of what the email (or patch) is about, preferably under 80 characters. What you supplied is an abstract. it should have been something as simple as: ftrace: Don't disable interrupts when taking read_lock() for graph tracer And don't rely on checkpatch.pl. Read Documentation/SubmittingPatches in the kernel proper. -- Steve
