>> Code looks good, how well was the rebase tested?
>
> After I've tested the code and submitted these ported patches, the
> only rebase was because of a small typo fix at one of the commit
> messages, so the results are still positive - fully tested on the
> real hardware
I meant the original rebase of Paul's work. What is "the real hard-
ware"? It should be primarily tested on previously supported pro-
grammers and flash chips to make sure nothing regresses.
3 comments:
Patch Set #1, Line 2: Author: Mike Banon <mikebdp2@gmail.com>
All my commit messages which contain Paul's code - are giving the credit to Paul by including the no […]
Well, that's why there are two fields "Author" and "Committer". If you
insist, I'll have to find out or make up what is allowed for this
project.
Patch Set #1, Line 7: [v4,1/6]
After these tags are removed, would it still be convenient to merge these patches in the correct ord […]
The order is clear in Git. These tags are usually used in emails
but not in a repository.
(The order is wrong anyway, we need the option to exclude EDI from
probing first.)
Patch Set #1, Line 17: Signed-off-by: Mike Banon <mikebdp2@gmail.com>
These patches have been modified to make them compatible with the latest flashrom, not taken as-is. […]
Ok that's fine. You are always free to take full responsibility.
To view, visit change 23258. To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit settings.