From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 11:26:45 -0500
Subject: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH 1/7] 83xx: nand support for
	MPC837XRDB	boards
In-Reply-To: <20080319201645.88467c0e.kim.phillips@freescale.com>
References: <20080314201942.GA22581@localhost.localdomain>
	<20080317230229.GA3717@loki.buserror.net>
	<20080318141055.GA28688@localhost.localdomain>
	<20080319201645.88467c0e.kim.phillips@freescale.com>
Message-ID: <20080320162645.GB3237@loki.buserror.net>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 08:16:45PM -0500, Kim Phillips wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 17:10:55 +0300
> Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@ru.mvista.com> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > > > -/* VSC7385 Gigabit Switch support */
> > > > +/*
> > > > + * VSC7385 Gigabit Switch support
> > > > + */
> > > > +#define CFG_VSC7385_BASE	0xF0000000
> > > 
> > > What does this have to do with NAND?
> > 
> > Nothing. I'm expanding VSC7385 comment to better separate it from
> > the NAND code. Most lengthy parts of the RDB config are using
> > 
> > /*
> >  *
> >  */
> > 
> > as a logical separator. So did I.
> 
> that's fine, it just makes patch review easier and less susceptible to
> comments like this if you keep your patches on-subject.

To be fair, the main reason for the comment was that I missed this line:
-#define CFG_VSC7385_BASE	0xF0000000

way at the top of the diff, and thought the patch was introducing the
#define rather than just reformatting the comment.

-Scott