On 18 November 2015 at 00:39, Fabio Estevam festevam@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 4:59 PM, Jagan Teki jteki@openedev.com wrote:
On 18 November 2015 at 00:20, Fabio Estevam festevam@gmail.com wrote:
From: Fabio Estevam fabio.estevam@freescale.com
SST SPI NOR flash has the same locking programming bits as ST Micro.
Add support for it.
Signed-off-by: Fabio Estevam fabio.estevam@freescale.com Reviewed-by: Jagan Teki jteki@openedev.com
Minor edit on commit message.
Not sure I understood your change. It seems to me that you changed "Add support for it" to "- added support for it."
OK, well I usually use imperative on commit header than the commit body something similar to this
sf: Add lock ops support to SST flash
Added lock operations which is similar to STmicro.
Signed-off-by: Jagan Teki jteki@openedev.com
Commit header says the doing work(imperative) and commit body has done work - this notation look easy to understand.
comments?
Why did you do this?
In U-boot and kernel we should use imperative mood in the commit log.
Please check http://www.denx.de/wiki/U-Boot/Patches and also Documentation/SubmittingPatches.
thanks!