Nico Huber has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/32407 )
Change subject: soc/amd/picasso: Create picasso as a copy of stoneyridge ......................................................................
Patch Set 1:
As I said, there points to be made for both ways. Honestly, this is the more difficult approach because I have to break things down to incremental changes. That makes it easier for people to review than just pushing the new files with all of the changes already in place, but if that's what people prefer, I'd be glad to do that.
Your approach makes it easier to review changed lines, yes. But it makes it nearly impossible to review what isn't changed. I know some reviewers prefer that, simply because it means less work for them. One can rubber stamp the first commit and blame the process if problems sneak in.
Please note, I haven't seen any datasheet from AMD yet, so I'll probably never be able to +2 any of this. I just care about it because I often try to maintain things across the tree and would probably give up if the only commit message I can find says nothing but "transparency, yeah!". It's very hard to work with the copy-pasta code base that our AMD stuff is, you can never tell by the Git history if a piece of code actually works on the platform you are looking at (or was even meant to be ever run on it).