[U-Boot] [PATCH v3 3/3] mx6sxsabresd: Add PCI support

[Marek Vasut]

On Monday, August 25, 2014 at 10:31:18 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 5:28 PM, Marek Vasut <marex at denx.de> wrote:
> > On Monday, August 25, 2014 at 10:24:19 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> >> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 5:11 PM, Fabio Estevam <festevam at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 4:50 PM, Marek Vasut <marex at denx.de> wrote:
> >> >> On Monday, August 25, 2014 at 07:26:46 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> >> >>> Tested with an Intel Wireless PCI 7260HMW card:
> >> >>> 
> >> >>> U-Boot 2014.10-rc1-16576-g4a8a8a8-dirty (Aug 23 2014 - 16:05:11)
> >> >>> 
> >> >>> CPU:   Freescale i.MX6SX rev1.0 at 792 MHz
> >> >>> Reset cause: WDOG
> >> >>> Board: MX6SX SABRE SDB
> >> >>> I2C:   ready
> >> >>> DRAM:  1 GiB
> >> >>> MMC:   FSL_SDHC: 0
> >> >>> 
> >> >>>   00:01.0     - 16c3:abcd - Bridge device
> >> >>>   
> >> >>>    01:00.0    - 8086:08b1 - Network controller
> >> >>> 
> >> >>> Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam at freescale.com>
> >> >> 
> >> >> Should this output be really part of the commit message?
> >> > 
> >> > Personally I don't see any problem with it, but if Stefano prefers I
> >> > can remove it and send a v4.
> >> 
> >> I like to have it  included.
> > 
> > Please explain what exactly is the worth of having 50% of commit message
> > contain standard U-Boot boot output, which is completely unrelated to
> > what the commit implements. The rest of the commit message fails to
> > explain what the commit does.
> > 
> > I would like to hear your reasoning for your claim.
> 
> I don't have to explain.

Sorry, but this is in no way how you proceed with a constructive discussion. I 
will cut the discussion here, since I am starting to see a recurring pattern and 
I am growing tired of this.

[...]

Best regards,
Marek Vasut