Warp patches for 2.6.26
Grant Likely
grant.likely at secretlab.ca
Sun Apr 13 12:09:23 EST 2008
On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 7:55 PM, Sean MacLennan <seanm at seanm.ca> wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 10:44:30 +1000
> "Stephen Rothwell" <sfr at canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> > Hi Sean,
> >
> > First comment is that you need reasonable changelogs i.e. explain why
> > you are making changes as well as what they do. Also the first line
> > of each changelog (which becomes the subject of any mail generated
> > from git) should be a useful and relatively unique summary.
> >
>
> These patches are an amalgamation of a lot of commits. For
> example, warp.c was changed 15 times since I last sent a patch to
> linuxppc-dev. warp-nand.c was probably changed even more as we kept
> shifting the design.
>
> One of the advantages of an FPGA based design is you can work around a
> lot of hardware problems. A disadvantage is that it is easy to change,
> so it changes a lot. And the HW guys push the specs out to after they
> actually get the feature going. There is no SW input into the FPGA
> design.
>
> So these patches are basically following the changes to the FPGA and
> changes to the hardware. As new functionality was added, I updated the
> code.
>
> Is there a particular way I should word this to make it a changelog?
You can still describe what the code changes; either by itemizing all
the changes; or if it now appears to be a whole new thing, but
describing what it does /now/. :-)
A changelog of "updates a bunch of stuff" is pretty much irrelevant in
all situations I can think of.
Cheers,
g.
--
Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list