From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jerry Van Baren Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 11:30:31 -0400 Subject: [U-Boot-Users] [PATCH 1/7] 83xx: nand support for MPC837XRDB boards In-Reply-To: <20080320163110.GA14349@localhost.localdomain> References: <20080314201942.GA22581@localhost.localdomain> <20080317230229.GA3717@loki.buserror.net> <20080318141055.GA28688@localhost.localdomain> <20080319201645.88467c0e.kim.phillips@freescale.com> <20080320162645.GB3237@loki.buserror.net> <20080320163110.GA14349@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <47E3D497.7010903@gmail.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Anton Vorontsov wrote: > On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 11:26:45AM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 08:16:45PM -0500, Kim Phillips wrote: >>> On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 17:10:55 +0300 >>> Anton Vorontsov 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. > > Nothing was introduced, but moved around. Anyway, I'll just drop it > on the next resend. Hi Anton, IMHO the move and reformat was a Good Thing[tm]. We (myself included) simply didn't understand what happened and it looked odd. I would encourage you to keep the move/reformat and leave the world a little cleaner and brighter. Thanks, gvb