Thanks for your guide. I will try to change the weakness of weak wording. ________________________________________ 发件人: Zhang, Qiang <[email protected]> 发送时间: 2020年5月28日 9:41 收件人: Markus Elfring; Tejun Heo; Lai Jiangshan 抄送: [email protected]; [email protected] 主题: 回复: [PATCH v5] workqueue: Remove unnecessary kfree() call in rcu_free_wq()
Thanks for your guide. I tried to change the weakness of weak wording ________________________________ 发件人: [email protected] <[email protected]> 代表 Markus Elfring <[email protected]> 发送时间: 2020年5月27日 16:20 收件人: Zhang, Qiang <[email protected]>; Tejun Heo <[email protected]>; Lai Jiangshan <[email protected]> 抄送: [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]> 主题: Re: [PATCH v5] workqueue: Remove unnecessary kfree() call in rcu_free_wq() > Thus delete this function call which became unnecessary with the referenced > software update. … > Suggested-by: Markus Elfring <[email protected]> Would the tag “Co-developed-by” be more appropriate according to the patch review to achieve a more pleasing commit message? > v1->v2->v3->v4->v5: > Modify weakly submitted information. Now I wonder about your wording choice “weakly”. Regards, Markus
