In message C459CCA3.F536%gerickson@nuovations.com you wrote:
"(C) DENX" and "(C) Stefan" are two fundamentally different things.
Never, never ever meddle with copyrights!!!
This comment applies to all files where you did this!!
It seemed like consistent formatting without changing the nature of the information seemed like a net improvement. Insofar as I read it, they say the same thing, Stefan Roese as a representative of DENX. Anyway, it is not worth debating and I can revert it easily enough.
Never ever mess with copyrights. And no, they are NOT the same thing.
"(C) Stefan Roese, DENX Software Engineering, sr@denx.de" says that the holder of the copyright is Stefan Roese (a natural person), who is working at/for DENX.
However, "(C) DENX Software Engineering GmbH, Stefan Roese sr@denx.de" says that the holder of the copyright is DENX (a legal entity), and Stefan is the person to contact.
In the former case all rights belong to Stefan, in the second case all rights are owned by DENX.
- Based on code provided from Senao and AMCC
...
Deleted the "Senao and AMCC" like since it was no longer true/accurate.
Well, the original code and the init parameters used are based on their code, and this should be properly attributed.
-#define CFG_MBYTES_SDRAM (256) /* 256MB */ +#define CFG_MBYTES_SDRAM 256
What is your rationale for such a change?
The mnemonic is self explanatory and the parens add no value since 256 is a constant.
Yet I find the first form much easier to read when skimming through the config file.
-#define CONFIG_POST (CFG_POST_MEMORY | \
CFG_POST_CACHE | \+#define CONFIG_POST (CFG_POST_CACHE | \
Ditto.
These ARE warranted. Specifying CFG_POST_MEMORY twice is redundant and removing one instance thereof changes nothing, operationally. I'll add a note to the commit/patch description.
Ah, you are right. From the patch it was not visible that there was a duplicate entry farther down in the file Sorry for the false alarm.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk