Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 6 Aug 2008 08:17:31 -0400 | From | "Mike Frysinger" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] blackfin/sram: use 'unsigned long' for irqflags |
| |
On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 8:14 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 7:28 AM, Vegard Nossum wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 1:05 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: >>> On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 6:58 AM, Vegard Nossum wrote: >>>> From 3ef36948a88a968eec1b09859aa251dc6727df4e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>>> From: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com> >>>> Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2008 12:00:23 +0200 >>>> Subject: [PATCH] blackfin/sram: use 'unsigned long' for irqflags >>>> >>>> Using just 'unsigned' will make flags an unsigned int. While this is >>>> arguably not an error on blackfin where sizeof(int) == sizeof(long), >>>> the patch is still justified on the grounds of principle. >>> >>> indeed, thanks >>> >>>> The patch was generated using the Coccinelle semantic patch framework. >>> >>> spam ? >> >> Hm? I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean by that. Do you think >> the credit is undeserved? > > *shrug* ... i dont see other patches with things like: > The patch was generated with git. > The patch was generated with eclipse. > The patch was generated with emacs. > etc... > > we dont generally list all of the tools in the log message that was > used in *creating* a patch since it doesnt really add any value when > looking back historically at changes.
although, such information may be fine in the region after --- where the diffstat normally shows up as that will not go into the log ... -mike
| |