Here again I am on the same level as Juraj. Repeating my previous
comments on commit subject and Bugzilla ID.
Moreover, the subject should be of imperative form according to the
contributing guidelines. In other words, the first word is always an
imperative verb. Something like this could work:
dts: enable self-discovering architecture
About the commit body indicating uncertainty ("I believe..."), there
shouldn't be space for uncertainty on the tree, but just backed-up
facts. If you are uncertain about something, make sure to find out if
the statement stands true and provide the reasoning around it.
You can find out if the call is a standard by looking up the manual[1].
In this case it doesn't mention anything except of being related to the
syscall[2], which is indeed backed up by the POSIX.1 standard. But you
can attempt to compare it to any other POSIX OS and draw some
conclusions. For example FreeBSD's manual[3], explicitly states that
their command is conform to the POSIX.2 standard. And you'll notice that
FreeBSD's has more options than Linux's. The conclusion I can gather
here is that Linux's version is not entirely conform and implements only
a subset. For our usage, this is good enough as it still falls under the
POSIX umbrella. Therefore, you can change your paragraph into something
like:
The POSIX-compliant options of the command `uname` are used
to determine the system architecture.
Hope this helps!
Best,
Luca
[1] https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man1/uname.1.html
[2] https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/uname.2.html
[3] https://man.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?uname
