From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Albert ARIBAUD <albert.u.boot@aribaud.net>
Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 09:16:58 +0200
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v5 02/14] net: ftgmac100: add MMU/D-cache
 support
In-Reply-To: <1371470824-3228-3-git-send-email-dantesu@gmail.com>
References: <1371470824-3228-1-git-send-email-dantesu@gmail.com>
	<1371470824-3228-3-git-send-email-dantesu@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20130623091658.6a4ec75c@lilith>
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

Hi Kuo-Jung,

On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 20:06:52 +0800, Kuo-Jung Su <dantesu@gmail.com>
wrote:

> 3. No matter if MMU/D-cache is on or off, this patch
>    always depends on previous patch:
> 
>    arm: dma_alloc_coherent: malloc() -> memalign().
> 
>    Because the FTGMAC100 expects the tx/rx descriptors
>    are always be aligned to 16-bytes boundary.

Nitpick: as a general rule, the commit message does not need to mention
that a patch in a series depends on a previous one; this is implied by
the series itself.

In fact, it should even /refrain/ from doing so because even though the
series is usually applied atomically, it is not impossible that a an
unrelated 'hot' bugfix patch slip in the middle of it, so "previous
patch", which makes sense at submission time, might not make sense any
more later.

Personally I like the commit message to only provide a short explanation
of the whys and hows of the patch itself, and put any additional info
after the commit message separator "---" below or, if using patman, in
the cover letter.

> Signed-off-by: Kuo-Jung Su <dantesu@faraday-tech.com>
> CC: Albert ARIBAUD <albert.u.boot@aribaud.net>
> CC: Joe Hershberger <joe.hershberger@gmail.com>
> CC: Tom Rini <trini@ti.com>
> ---
> Changes for v5:

Amicalement,
-- 
Albert.