Am 12.04.2011 09:27, schrieb Albert ARIBAUD:
> Hi Matthias,
>
> Le 12/04/2011 09:13, Matthias Weißer a écrit :
>> Am 12.04.2011 09:06, schrieb Albert ARIBAUD:
>>> Hi Matthias,
>>>
>>> Le 12/04/2011 08:58, Matthias Weisser a écrit :
>>>> In some cases (e.g. bootm with a elf payload) there is a in place
>>>> copy of
>>>> data to the same address. Catching this saves some ms while booting.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Matthias Weisser<weiss...@arcor.de>
>>>> ---
>>>> lib/string.c | 9 +++++++++
>>>> 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> I believe that is a V2 patch, right? Please tag it as V2 in the subject
>>> line, and add patch history below the commit message delimiter ('---' ).
>>
>> No, it is a replacement for http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/79447/
>> which picks up a suggestion from Wolfgang.
>
> So it is a V3, not V2, but still you must tag it so that readers who see
> the previous patch can relate it to the 'replacement' -- yes, even if
> the files touched by V2 are different.Well, as the patch is only slightly related to my original one I thought it is better to start a new patch as I had to change the subject also. The only relation between them would be the reference in the mail header. Maybe Wolfgang can bring some light into this situation. What would be the right way to post this patch? And what would be the right way to post a patch doing exactly the same to the ARM optimized version of memcpy? Sorry for all that administrative questions. Regards, Matthias _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
