On Monday, August 25, 2014 at 10:31:18 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: > On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 5:28 PM, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: > > On Monday, August 25, 2014 at 10:24:19 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: > >> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 5:11 PM, Fabio Estevam <feste...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 4:50 PM, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: > >> >> On Monday, August 25, 2014 at 07:26:46 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote: > >> >>> Tested with an Intel Wireless PCI 7260HMW card: > >> >>> > >> >>> U-Boot 2014.10-rc1-16576-g4a8a8a8-dirty (Aug 23 2014 - 16:05:11) > >> >>> > >> >>> CPU: Freescale i.MX6SX rev1.0 at 792 MHz > >> >>> Reset cause: WDOG > >> >>> Board: MX6SX SABRE SDB > >> >>> I2C: ready > >> >>> DRAM: 1 GiB > >> >>> MMC: FSL_SDHC: 0 > >> >>> > >> >>> 00:01.0 - 16c3:abcd - Bridge device > >> >>> > >> >>> 01:00.0 - 8086:08b1 - Network controller > >> >>> > >> >>> Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam <fabio.este...@freescale.com> > >> >> > >> >> Should this output be really part of the commit message? > >> > > >> > Personally I don't see any problem with it, but if Stefano prefers I > >> > can remove it and send a v4. > >> > >> I like to have it included. > > > > Please explain what exactly is the worth of having 50% of commit message > > contain standard U-Boot boot output, which is completely unrelated to > > what the commit implements. The rest of the commit message fails to > > explain what the commit does. > > > > I would like to hear your reasoning for your claim. > > I don't have to explain.
Sorry, but this is in no way how you proceed with a constructive discussion. I will cut the discussion here, since I am starting to see a recurring pattern and I am growing tired of this. [...] Best regards, Marek Vasut _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
