On 5/14/19 5:48 PM, Alex Bennée wrote: > > Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.m.m...@gmail.com> writes: > >> On May 10, 2019 8:57 PM, "Richard Henderson" <richard.hender...@linaro.org> >> wrote: >>> >> >> Please change the title to 'target/mips: Switch to using >> mips_cpu_tlb_fill()', or something along that line. > > It does seem a little redundant as "target/mips:" already marks it as a > mips specific change and viewing the log you can see a series of > architectures being converted to a new API. > >> Also, the reason for changing the field access_type to mips_access type >> should be explained in the commit message. > > ok > >> This commit message is generally poor, as it explains relatively >> unimportant logging issue, while not explaining the core of the >> change. > > Surely the core of the change is explained in the main patches that > introduce the new API? I think it would be redundant to repeat that for > every individual architecture touched. It's a shame it's hard to > explicitly reference a patch in the same series as the commit hashes are > not yet permanent. At least when we fix things referring to the short > hash of the original commit is fairly easy.
Except in the case the maintainer is sending a pull request (like here) where he can manually fix the commits. Still this is a PITA... > > Generally for an architecture conversion I want to know what might be > different from other architectures converted. If it is a broadly > mechanical change it doesn't need to be too detailed.
