[S] Change in coreboot[master]: soc/intel/xeon_sp/spr: Remove stale call to xeonsp_init_cpu_config

[Nico Huber (Code Review)]

Nico Huber has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/74436 )

Change subject: soc/intel/xeon_sp/spr: Remove stale call to xeonsp_init_cpu_config
......................................................................

Patch Set 6:

(5 comments)

Commit Message:

https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/74436/comment/3c95f409_b22d8910 
PS6, Line 9: This fixes the Jenkins build error 
In the long run, this is not useful information in the commit history.
If it's worth mentioning, maybe put it later? If put first, such information
tends to pressure people to hurry and then they might miss something.

If you only mention it for the reviewers, not for the ages in the Git
history, you can also put it in a comment on Gerrit.

https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/74436/comment/bd25b6a6_bca9aef3 
PS6, Line 10: that was caused by the API change in commit 36e6f9bc047f86e1628c8c41d3ac16d80fb344de. This patch removes the
Please break lines before 72 chars.

Please don't make reviewers bikeshed such things when everybody is in
a hurry because something needs to be fixed. It only brings people into
an awkward position (lowering their standards or slowing a fix down, what
should it be?).

https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/74436/comment/3ebdb744_cb9ba94d 
PS6, Line 10: commit 36e6f9bc047f86e1628c8c41d3ac16d80fb344de
This is not the cannonical form, we usually abbreviate the commit hash
and put the commit summary in parentheses, e.g.

commit 12345678abcd (Example commit summary)

https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/74436/comment/3f55d09f_c37b58c4 
PS6, Line 12: commit mentioned above.
Now at least you explain what is done, but still not why. AIUI, this
patch is complementing the other, because a new copy of the code was
added in the meantime. Why not mention that?

File src/soc/intel/xeon_sp/spr/cpu.c:

https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/74436/comment/f61ad8dd_0a09ac7f 
PS3, Line 83: 	       cpu->path.apic.package_id);
> Is that ok?

Absolutely not, you didn't even take the time to break your lines. Please
don't trial review by error (trying things until the reviewer agrees). It's
very exhausting for reviewers. Writing a good commit message is a courtesy
to our future selves, including yours, and other community members. If one
of us reads this commit in two weeks, it shouldn't take more than a few
seconds to see that everything is alright. And that's best achieved with
a commit message that explains the whole thing.