Hi, Le lundi 08 avril 2019 à 19:03 +0530, Jagan Teki a écrit : > On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 6:40 PM Paul Kocialkowski > <paul.kocialkow...@bootlin.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Le lundi 08 avril 2019 à 18:23 +0530, Jagan Teki a écrit : > > > Hi Paul, > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 6:00 PM Paul Kocialkowski > > > <paul.kocialkow...@bootlin.com> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2019-04-04 at 05:51 -0300, Pablo Sebastián Greco wrote: > > > > > A few days ago I tried to boot my Bananapi_M2_Ultra with 2019.04rc, I > > > > > found that it wasn't booting, 2019.01 was working ok. > > > > > Bisecting indicated that the problem was after > > > > > http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=commitdiff;h=a7cca5793774ee139b75a704d6efaa4d29f09f93 > > > > > > > > I think the patch should be reverted ASAP since it obviously breaks > > > > some supported configs. Sadly, the offending commit doesn't say > > > > anything about the test coverage for the change and what the status is > > > > after it. There is probably a reason why it was enabled for sun4i only > > > > before and there must have been a motivation for doing this on all > > > > sunxi platforms, but then again, the commit message says nothing about > > > > those underlying reasons. > > > > > > > > I believe we should be more strict on patch review and not let any > > > > change bringing such a major change get applied with a commit message > > > > that provides no context about why the change is okay and how it was > > > > tested. > > > > > > Appropriate your concern. > > > > > > If you please list what all boards are not working with this effect, > > > please write back. we will defiantly look into it. All these changes > > > were merged in MW which is 2.5 months back, commenting in final stage > > > like this is not the professional way. > > > > I really do not think this is a sane approach to follow. You can't make > > a change like this, with no context whatsoever in the commit message, > > which ends up breaking other people's setups and wait for others to > > debug subsequent issues it introduces that you don't encounter. > > > > Sorry but your commit should never have been merged. Sure, I wasn't > > there to review it either, but the code review process definitely did > > not go as planned here. > > Which commit message your referring to? are you referring this > patch[1] commit message. let me point what exactly is the issue? > > [1] > http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=commit;h=a7cca5793774ee139b75a704d6efaa4d29f09f93
Yes, this is the patch I'm talking about. The issue with it is that the commit message is totally redundant: the description does not say more than what the diff does. A git commit description should provide context about what the change does above the modified lines: what problem it tries to resolve and how , on what hardware, how it was tested, etc. Especially for a commit making such a big change, the commit message must have all this information. Do you see why I think it's a problem? Cheers, Paul -- Paul Kocialkowski, Bootlin Embedded Linux and kernel engineering https://bootlin.com _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot