As far as I can tell, the GPL does not require you to indicate what specific changes you make to a GPL-licensed work. The GPLv3 says
The work must carry prominent notices stating that you modified it, and giving a relevant date.
And the GPLv2 says:
You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating that you changed the files and the date of any change.
I'm not a lawyer, but the language here seems to require only a positive affirmation that modification did occur, acommpanied by data about when and by whom the modification was done. I don't read any suggestion that such a modification-notice mu.st detail the kinds of changes performed. I don't know of any case law about this, and I doubt there is any, since I would not expect an author of GPL'd work to follow through on a lawsuit about downstream modification messages not being specific enough.
As I read this requirement, it can be satisfied by a per-file statement like, "This file was modified by Jane Doe in 2018." In fact, this is essentially what a copyright notice ("Copyright 2018 Jane Doe") is, which the FSF encourages you to add to your file headers anyway. I suspect many people who modify GPL-licensed software forgo an explicit modification notice and directly rely on a copyright notice to satisfy the modification-notice requirement. (However, I cannot advise whether or not this is legally rigorous thing to do.)