On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 01:03:36PM +0100, Jakob Koschel wrote: > >> @@ -954,7 +957,6 @@ net2272_dequeue(struct usb_ep *_ep, struct usb_request > >> *_req) > >> dev_dbg(ep->dev->dev, "unlink (%s) pio\n", _ep->name); > >> net2272_done(ep, req, -ECONNRESET); > >> } > >> - req = NULL; > > > > Another unrelated change. These are all good changes but send them as > > separate patches. > > You are referring to the req = NULL, right?
Yes. > > I've changed the use of 'req' in the same function and assumed that I can > just remove the unnecessary statement. But if it's better to do separately > I'll do that. > These are all changes which made me pause during my review to figure out why they were necessary. The line between what is a related part of a patch is a bit vague and some maintainers will ask you to add or subtract from a patch depending on their individual tastes. I don't really have an exact answer, but I felt like this patch needs to be subtracted from. Especially if there is a whole chunk of the patch which can be removed, then to me, that obviously should be in a different patch. regards, dan carpenter
