On Fri, Feb 06, 2015 at 09:36:08AM +0000, Nick Hoath wrote: > On 06/02/2015 08:52, Daniel Vetter wrote: > >On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 05:51:46PM +0000, Damien Lespiau wrote: > >>On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 10:47:18AM +0000, Nick Hoath wrote: > >>>From: "Hoath, Nicholas" <nicholas.hoath@xxxxxxxxx> > >>> > >>>Add: > >>>WaDisablePartialInstShootdown > >> > >>Just an editor note: that's not really additional information compared > >>to the subject of the patch. Also subject message could be a bit more > >>direct and mention SKL: > >> > >> drm/i915/skl: Implement WaDisablePartialInstShootdown > > > >Well it's gen9 but yeah. The commit message body should explain the > >commit (e.g. more details on impact), but for w/a that's only really > >required if there's been an outside report. > So an empty body is ok if the subject has sufficient information? Yeah for hw wa there's often not more to say. Except when some details about the impact are known which are relevant (e.g. existing bug report or not wa for a feature not yet used in upstream). Generally an empty commit message is a bit thin, but just repeating the summar doesn't add value. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
