bluetooth: make bnep_sock_cleanup() return void

[safe/jmp/linux-2.6] / Documentation / SubmittingPatches

diff --git a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
index 0958e97..08a1ed1 100644 (file)
--- a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
+++ b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches
@@ -122,11 +122,11 @@ then only post say 15 or so at a time and wait for review and integration.
 
 Check your patch for basic style violations, details of which can be
 found in Documentation/CodingStyle.  Failure to do so simply wastes
-the reviewers time and will get your patch rejected, probabally
+the reviewers time and will get your patch rejected, probably
 without even being read.
 
 At a minimum you should check your patches with the patch style
-checker prior to submission (scripts/patchcheck.pl).  You should
+checker prior to submission (scripts/checkpatch.pl).  You should
 be able to justify all violations that remain in your patch.
 
 
@@ -220,20 +220,8 @@ decreasing the likelihood of your MIME-attached change being accepted.
 Exception:  If your mailer is mangling patches then someone may ask
 you to re-send them using MIME.
 
-
-WARNING: Some mailers like Mozilla send your messages with
----- message header ----
-Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
----- message header ----
-The problem is that "format=flowed" makes some of the mailers
-on receiving side to replace TABs with spaces and do similar
-changes. Thus the patches from you can look corrupted.
-
-To fix this just make your mozilla defaults/pref/mailnews.js file to look like:
-pref("mailnews.send_plaintext_flowed", false); // RFC 2646=======
-pref("mailnews.display.disable_format_flowed_support", true);
-
-
+See Documentation/email-clients.txt for hints about configuring
+your e-mail client so that it sends your patches untouched.
 
 8) E-mail size.
 
@@ -464,9 +452,25 @@ section Linus Computer Science 101.
 Nuff said.  If your code deviates too much from this, it is likely
 to be rejected without further review, and without comment.
 
+One significant exception is when moving code from one file to
+another -- in this case you should not modify the moved code at all in
+the same patch which moves it.  This clearly delineates the act of
+moving the code and your changes.  This greatly aids review of the
+actual differences and allows tools to better track the history of
+the code itself.
+
 Check your patches with the patch style checker prior to submission
-(scripts/checkpatch.pl).  You should be able to justify all
-violations that remain in your patch.
+(scripts/checkpatch.pl).  The style checker should be viewed as
+a guide not as the final word.  If your code looks better with
+a violation then its probably best left alone.
+
+The checker reports at three levels:
+ - ERROR: things that are very likely to be wrong
+ - WARNING: things requiring careful review
+ - CHECK: things requiring thought
+
+You should be able to justify all violations that remain in your
+patch.
 
 
 
@@ -544,7 +548,7 @@ NO!!!! No more huge patch bombs to linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org people!
   <http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=112112749912944&w=2>
 
 Kernel Documentation/CodingStyle:
-  <http://sosdg.org/~coywolf/lxr/source/Documentation/CodingStyle>
+  <http://users.sosdg.org/~qiyong/lxr/source/Documentation/CodingStyle>
 
 Linus Torvalds's mail on the canonical patch format:
   <http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/4/7/183>