Re: [RESEND 00/53] Rid GPU from W=1 warnings
On Fri, 19 Mar 2021, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 08:24:07AM +, Lee Jones wrote: > > On Thu, 18 Mar 2021, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 9:32 PM Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 9:17 AM Lee Jones wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 09:19:32AM +, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, 05 Mar 2021, Roland Scheidegger wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The vmwgfx ones look all good to me, so for > > > > > > > > > 23-53: Reviewed-by: Roland Scheidegger > > > > > > > > > That said, they were already signed off by Zack, so not sure > > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > happened here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, they were accepted at one point, then dropped without a > > > > > > > > reason. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since I rebased onto the latest -next, I had to pluck them back > > > > > > > > out of > > > > > > > > a previous one. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They should show up in linux-next again. We merge patches for > > > > > > > next merge > > > > > > > window even during the current merge window, but need to make > > > > > > > sure they > > > > > > > don't pollute linux-next. Occasionally the cut off is wrong so > > > > > > > patches > > > > > > > show up, and then get pulled again. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately especially the 5.12 merge cycle was very wobbly due > > > > > > > to some > > > > > > > confusion here. But your patches should all be in linux-next > > > > > > > again (they > > > > > > > are queued up for 5.13 in drm-misc-next, I checked that). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry for the confusion here. > > > > > > > > > > > > Oh, I see. Well so long as they don't get dropped, I'll be happy. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the explanation Daniel > > > > > > > > > > After rebasing today, all of my GPU patches have remained. Would > > > > > someone be kind enough to check that everything is still in order > > > > > please? > > > > > > > > It's still broken somehow. I've kiced Maxime and Maarten again, > > > > they're also on this thread. > > > > > > You're patches have made it into drm-next meanwhile, so they should > > > show up in linux-next through that tree at least. Except if that one > > > also has some trouble. > > > > Thanks for letting me know. > > > > I see some patches made it back in, others didn't. > > > > I'll resend the stragglers - bear with. > > The vmwgfx ones should all be back, the others I guess just werent ever > applied. I'll vacuum them all up if you resend. Apologies for the wobbly > ride. NP, it happens. -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
Re: [RESEND 00/53] Rid GPU from W=1 warnings
On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 08:24:07AM +, Lee Jones wrote: > On Thu, 18 Mar 2021, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 9:32 PM Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 9:17 AM Lee Jones wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 09:19:32AM +, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, 05 Mar 2021, Roland Scheidegger wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The vmwgfx ones look all good to me, so for > > > > > > > > 23-53: Reviewed-by: Roland Scheidegger > > > > > > > > That said, they were already signed off by Zack, so not sure > > > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > happened here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, they were accepted at one point, then dropped without a > > > > > > > reason. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since I rebased onto the latest -next, I had to pluck them back > > > > > > > out of > > > > > > > a previous one. > > > > > > > > > > > > They should show up in linux-next again. We merge patches for next > > > > > > merge > > > > > > window even during the current merge window, but need to make sure > > > > > > they > > > > > > don't pollute linux-next. Occasionally the cut off is wrong so > > > > > > patches > > > > > > show up, and then get pulled again. > > > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately especially the 5.12 merge cycle was very wobbly due > > > > > > to some > > > > > > confusion here. But your patches should all be in linux-next again > > > > > > (they > > > > > > are queued up for 5.13 in drm-misc-next, I checked that). > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry for the confusion here. > > > > > > > > > > Oh, I see. Well so long as they don't get dropped, I'll be happy. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the explanation Daniel > > > > > > > > After rebasing today, all of my GPU patches have remained. Would > > > > someone be kind enough to check that everything is still in order > > > > please? > > > > > > It's still broken somehow. I've kiced Maxime and Maarten again, > > > they're also on this thread. > > > > You're patches have made it into drm-next meanwhile, so they should > > show up in linux-next through that tree at least. Except if that one > > also has some trouble. > > Thanks for letting me know. > > I see some patches made it back in, others didn't. > > I'll resend the stragglers - bear with. The vmwgfx ones should all be back, the others I guess just werent ever applied. I'll vacuum them all up if you resend. Apologies for the wobbly ride. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch
Re: [RESEND 00/53] Rid GPU from W=1 warnings
On Thu, 18 Mar 2021, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 9:32 PM Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 9:17 AM Lee Jones wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 09:19:32AM +, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, 05 Mar 2021, Roland Scheidegger wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > The vmwgfx ones look all good to me, so for > > > > > > > 23-53: Reviewed-by: Roland Scheidegger > > > > > > > That said, they were already signed off by Zack, so not sure what > > > > > > > happened here. > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, they were accepted at one point, then dropped without a reason. > > > > > > > > > > > > Since I rebased onto the latest -next, I had to pluck them back out > > > > > > of > > > > > > a previous one. > > > > > > > > > > They should show up in linux-next again. We merge patches for next > > > > > merge > > > > > window even during the current merge window, but need to make sure > > > > > they > > > > > don't pollute linux-next. Occasionally the cut off is wrong so patches > > > > > show up, and then get pulled again. > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately especially the 5.12 merge cycle was very wobbly due to > > > > > some > > > > > confusion here. But your patches should all be in linux-next again > > > > > (they > > > > > are queued up for 5.13 in drm-misc-next, I checked that). > > > > > > > > > > Sorry for the confusion here. > > > > > > > > Oh, I see. Well so long as they don't get dropped, I'll be happy. > > > > > > > > Thanks for the explanation Daniel > > > > > > After rebasing today, all of my GPU patches have remained. Would > > > someone be kind enough to check that everything is still in order > > > please? > > > > It's still broken somehow. I've kiced Maxime and Maarten again, > > they're also on this thread. > > You're patches have made it into drm-next meanwhile, so they should > show up in linux-next through that tree at least. Except if that one > also has some trouble. Thanks for letting me know. I see some patches made it back in, others didn't. I'll resend the stragglers - bear with. -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
Re: [RESEND 00/53] Rid GPU from W=1 warnings
On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 9:32 PM Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 9:17 AM Lee Jones wrote: > > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 09:19:32AM +, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 05 Mar 2021, Roland Scheidegger wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > The vmwgfx ones look all good to me, so for > > > > > > 23-53: Reviewed-by: Roland Scheidegger > > > > > > That said, they were already signed off by Zack, so not sure what > > > > > > happened here. > > > > > > > > > > Yes, they were accepted at one point, then dropped without a reason. > > > > > > > > > > Since I rebased onto the latest -next, I had to pluck them back out of > > > > > a previous one. > > > > > > > > They should show up in linux-next again. We merge patches for next merge > > > > window even during the current merge window, but need to make sure they > > > > don't pollute linux-next. Occasionally the cut off is wrong so patches > > > > show up, and then get pulled again. > > > > > > > > Unfortunately especially the 5.12 merge cycle was very wobbly due to > > > > some > > > > confusion here. But your patches should all be in linux-next again (they > > > > are queued up for 5.13 in drm-misc-next, I checked that). > > > > > > > > Sorry for the confusion here. > > > > > > Oh, I see. Well so long as they don't get dropped, I'll be happy. > > > > > > Thanks for the explanation Daniel > > > > After rebasing today, all of my GPU patches have remained. Would > > someone be kind enough to check that everything is still in order > > please? > > It's still broken somehow. I've kiced Maxime and Maarten again, > they're also on this thread. You're patches have made it into drm-next meanwhile, so they should show up in linux-next through that tree at least. Except if that one also has some trouble. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch
Re: [RESEND 00/53] Rid GPU from W=1 warnings
On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 9:17 AM Lee Jones wrote: > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Lee Jones wrote: > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 09:19:32AM +, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > On Fri, 05 Mar 2021, Roland Scheidegger wrote: > > > > > > > > > The vmwgfx ones look all good to me, so for > > > > > 23-53: Reviewed-by: Roland Scheidegger > > > > > That said, they were already signed off by Zack, so not sure what > > > > > happened here. > > > > > > > > Yes, they were accepted at one point, then dropped without a reason. > > > > > > > > Since I rebased onto the latest -next, I had to pluck them back out of > > > > a previous one. > > > > > > They should show up in linux-next again. We merge patches for next merge > > > window even during the current merge window, but need to make sure they > > > don't pollute linux-next. Occasionally the cut off is wrong so patches > > > show up, and then get pulled again. > > > > > > Unfortunately especially the 5.12 merge cycle was very wobbly due to some > > > confusion here. But your patches should all be in linux-next again (they > > > are queued up for 5.13 in drm-misc-next, I checked that). > > > > > > Sorry for the confusion here. > > > > Oh, I see. Well so long as they don't get dropped, I'll be happy. > > > > Thanks for the explanation Daniel > > After rebasing today, all of my GPU patches have remained. Would > someone be kind enough to check that everything is still in order > please? It's still broken somehow. I've kiced Maxime and Maarten again, they're also on this thread. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch
Re: [RESEND 00/53] Rid GPU from W=1 warnings
On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Lee Jones wrote: > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 09:19:32AM +, Lee Jones wrote: > > > On Fri, 05 Mar 2021, Roland Scheidegger wrote: > > > > > > > The vmwgfx ones look all good to me, so for > > > > 23-53: Reviewed-by: Roland Scheidegger > > > > That said, they were already signed off by Zack, so not sure what > > > > happened here. > > > > > > Yes, they were accepted at one point, then dropped without a reason. > > > > > > Since I rebased onto the latest -next, I had to pluck them back out of > > > a previous one. > > > > They should show up in linux-next again. We merge patches for next merge > > window even during the current merge window, but need to make sure they > > don't pollute linux-next. Occasionally the cut off is wrong so patches > > show up, and then get pulled again. > > > > Unfortunately especially the 5.12 merge cycle was very wobbly due to some > > confusion here. But your patches should all be in linux-next again (they > > are queued up for 5.13 in drm-misc-next, I checked that). > > > > Sorry for the confusion here. > > Oh, I see. Well so long as they don't get dropped, I'll be happy. > > Thanks for the explanation Daniel After rebasing today, all of my GPU patches have remained. Would someone be kind enough to check that everything is still in order please? -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
Re: [RESEND 00/53] Rid GPU from W=1 warnings
On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 09:19:32AM +, Lee Jones wrote: > > On Fri, 05 Mar 2021, Roland Scheidegger wrote: > > > > > The vmwgfx ones look all good to me, so for > > > 23-53: Reviewed-by: Roland Scheidegger > > > That said, they were already signed off by Zack, so not sure what > > > happened here. > > > > Yes, they were accepted at one point, then dropped without a reason. > > > > Since I rebased onto the latest -next, I had to pluck them back out of > > a previous one. > > They should show up in linux-next again. We merge patches for next merge > window even during the current merge window, but need to make sure they > don't pollute linux-next. Occasionally the cut off is wrong so patches > show up, and then get pulled again. > > Unfortunately especially the 5.12 merge cycle was very wobbly due to some > confusion here. But your patches should all be in linux-next again (they > are queued up for 5.13 in drm-misc-next, I checked that). > > Sorry for the confusion here. Oh, I see. Well so long as they don't get dropped, I'll be happy. Thanks for the explanation Daniel -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
Re: [RESEND 00/53] Rid GPU from W=1 warnings
On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 09:19:32AM +, Lee Jones wrote: > On Fri, 05 Mar 2021, Roland Scheidegger wrote: > > > The vmwgfx ones look all good to me, so for > > 23-53: Reviewed-by: Roland Scheidegger > > That said, they were already signed off by Zack, so not sure what > > happened here. > > Yes, they were accepted at one point, then dropped without a reason. > > Since I rebased onto the latest -next, I had to pluck them back out of > a previous one. They should show up in linux-next again. We merge patches for next merge window even during the current merge window, but need to make sure they don't pollute linux-next. Occasionally the cut off is wrong so patches show up, and then get pulled again. Unfortunately especially the 5.12 merge cycle was very wobbly due to some confusion here. But your patches should all be in linux-next again (they are queued up for 5.13 in drm-misc-next, I checked that). Sorry for the confusion here. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch
Re: [RESEND 00/53] Rid GPU from W=1 warnings
On Fri, 05 Mar 2021, Roland Scheidegger wrote: > The vmwgfx ones look all good to me, so for > 23-53: Reviewed-by: Roland Scheidegger > That said, they were already signed off by Zack, so not sure what > happened here. Yes, they were accepted at one point, then dropped without a reason. Since I rebased onto the latest -next, I had to pluck them back out of a previous one. -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
Re: [RESEND 00/53] Rid GPU from W=1 warnings
The vmwgfx ones look all good to me, so for
23-53: Reviewed-by: Roland Scheidegger
That said, they were already signed off by Zack, so not sure what
happened here.
Roland
On 03.03.21 14:42, Lee Jones wrote:
> This is a resend. All of these patches have been sent before.
>
> The vmwgfx ones were even applied, but were dropped for some reason.
>
> Lee Jones (53):
> drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init: Demote obvious abuse of kernel-doc
> drm/nouveau/dispnv50/disp: Remove unused variable 'ret'
> drm/msm/dp/dp_display: Remove unused variable 'hpd'
> drm/amd/display/dc/bios/command_table: Remove unused variable
> include: drm: drm_atomic: Make use of 'new_plane_state'
> drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/volt/gk20a: Demote non-conformant kernel-doc
> headers
> drm/amd/display/dc/bios/command_table: Remove unused variable and
> associated comment
> drm/amd/display/dc/calcs/dce_calcs: Move some large variables from the
> stack to the heap
> drm/amd/display/dc/calcs/dce_calcs: Remove some large variables from
> the stack
> drm/amd/display/dc/dce/dce_aux: Remove duplicate line causing 'field
> overwritten' issue
> drm/amd/display/dc/dce80/dce80_resource: Make local functions static
> drm/nouveau/nvkm/engine/gr/gf100: Demote non-conformant kernel-doc
> header
> drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo: Remove unused variables 'dev'
> drm/nouveau/nouveau_display: Remove set but unused variable 'width'
> drm/nouveau/dispnv04/crtc: Demote non-conforming kernel-doc headers
> drm/nouveau/dispnv50/disp: Remove unused variable 'ret' from function
> returning void
> drm/nouveau/dispnv50/headc57d: Make local function 'headc57d_olut'
> static
> drm/nouveau/nv50_display: Remove superfluous prototype for local
> static functions
> drm/nouveau/dispnv50/disp: Include header containing our prototypes
> drm/nouveau/nouveau_ioc32: File headers are not good candidates for
> kernel-doc
> drm/nouveau/nouveau_svm: Remove unused variable 'ret' from void
> function
> drm/nouveau/nouveau_ioc32: Demote kernel-doc abuse to standard comment
> block
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_execbuf: Fix some kernel-doc related issues
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms: Remove unused variable 'ret' from
> 'vmw_du_primary_plane_atomic_check()'
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms: Mark vmw_{cursor,primary}_plane_formats as
> __maybe_unused
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_drv: Fix some kernel-doc misdemeanours
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_ioctl: Provide missing '@' sign required by
> kernel-doc
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_resource: Fix worthy function headers demote some
> others
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_ttm_buffer: Supply some missing parameter
> descriptions
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_fifo: Demote non-conformant kernel-doc header
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_ldu: Supply descriptions for 'state' function
> parameter
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms: Update worthy function headers and demote
> others
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_overlay: Demote kernel-doc abuses to standard
> comment blocks
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_fence: Add, remove and demote various documentation
> params/headers
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_bo: Remove superfluous param description and supply
> another
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_context: Demote kernel-doc abuses
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_scrn: Demote unworthy kernel-doc headers and update
> others
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_surface: Fix some kernel-doc related issues
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cmdbuf_res: Rename param description and remove
> another
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_shader: Demote kernel-doc abuses and fix-up worthy
> headers
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cmdbuf: Fix a bunch of missing or incorrectly
> formatted/named params
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cmdbuf_res: Remove unused variable 'ret'
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_stdu: Add some missing param/member descriptions
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cmdbuf: Fix misnaming of 'headers' should be plural
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cotable: Fix a couple of simple documentation
> problems
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_so: Add description for 'vmw_view's 'rcu' member
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_binding: Provide some missing param descriptions and
> remove others
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_msg: Fix misspelling of 'msg'
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_blit: Add description for 'vmw_bo_cpu_blit's 'diff'
> param
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_validation: Add some missing struct member/function
> param descriptions
> drm/vmwgfx/ttm_object: Demote half-assed headers and fix-up another
> drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_thp: Add description for 'vmw_thp_manager's member
> 'manager'
> drm/vmwgfx/ttm_object: Reorder header to immediately precede its
> struct
>
> .../drm/amd/display/dc/bios/command_table.c | 16 +-
> .../gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/calcs/dce_calcs.c | 1151 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/dce/dce_aux.h |1 -
> .../drm/amd/display/dc/dce80/dce80_resource.c | 16 +-
> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_display.c |3 -
> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv04/crtc.c |4 +-
> drivers/gpu/drm/n
[RESEND 00/53] Rid GPU from W=1 warnings
This is a resend. All of these patches have been sent before.
The vmwgfx ones were even applied, but were dropped for some reason.
Lee Jones (53):
drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init: Demote obvious abuse of kernel-doc
drm/nouveau/dispnv50/disp: Remove unused variable 'ret'
drm/msm/dp/dp_display: Remove unused variable 'hpd'
drm/amd/display/dc/bios/command_table: Remove unused variable
include: drm: drm_atomic: Make use of 'new_plane_state'
drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/volt/gk20a: Demote non-conformant kernel-doc
headers
drm/amd/display/dc/bios/command_table: Remove unused variable and
associated comment
drm/amd/display/dc/calcs/dce_calcs: Move some large variables from the
stack to the heap
drm/amd/display/dc/calcs/dce_calcs: Remove some large variables from
the stack
drm/amd/display/dc/dce/dce_aux: Remove duplicate line causing 'field
overwritten' issue
drm/amd/display/dc/dce80/dce80_resource: Make local functions static
drm/nouveau/nvkm/engine/gr/gf100: Demote non-conformant kernel-doc
header
drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo: Remove unused variables 'dev'
drm/nouveau/nouveau_display: Remove set but unused variable 'width'
drm/nouveau/dispnv04/crtc: Demote non-conforming kernel-doc headers
drm/nouveau/dispnv50/disp: Remove unused variable 'ret' from function
returning void
drm/nouveau/dispnv50/headc57d: Make local function 'headc57d_olut'
static
drm/nouveau/nv50_display: Remove superfluous prototype for local
static functions
drm/nouveau/dispnv50/disp: Include header containing our prototypes
drm/nouveau/nouveau_ioc32: File headers are not good candidates for
kernel-doc
drm/nouveau/nouveau_svm: Remove unused variable 'ret' from void
function
drm/nouveau/nouveau_ioc32: Demote kernel-doc abuse to standard comment
block
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_execbuf: Fix some kernel-doc related issues
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms: Remove unused variable 'ret' from
'vmw_du_primary_plane_atomic_check()'
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms: Mark vmw_{cursor,primary}_plane_formats as
__maybe_unused
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_drv: Fix some kernel-doc misdemeanours
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_ioctl: Provide missing '@' sign required by
kernel-doc
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_resource: Fix worthy function headers demote some
others
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_ttm_buffer: Supply some missing parameter
descriptions
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_fifo: Demote non-conformant kernel-doc header
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_ldu: Supply descriptions for 'state' function
parameter
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms: Update worthy function headers and demote
others
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_overlay: Demote kernel-doc abuses to standard
comment blocks
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_fence: Add, remove and demote various documentation
params/headers
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_bo: Remove superfluous param description and supply
another
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_context: Demote kernel-doc abuses
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_scrn: Demote unworthy kernel-doc headers and update
others
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_surface: Fix some kernel-doc related issues
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cmdbuf_res: Rename param description and remove
another
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_shader: Demote kernel-doc abuses and fix-up worthy
headers
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cmdbuf: Fix a bunch of missing or incorrectly
formatted/named params
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cmdbuf_res: Remove unused variable 'ret'
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_stdu: Add some missing param/member descriptions
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cmdbuf: Fix misnaming of 'headers' should be plural
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cotable: Fix a couple of simple documentation
problems
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_so: Add description for 'vmw_view's 'rcu' member
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_binding: Provide some missing param descriptions and
remove others
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_msg: Fix misspelling of 'msg'
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_blit: Add description for 'vmw_bo_cpu_blit's 'diff'
param
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_validation: Add some missing struct member/function
param descriptions
drm/vmwgfx/ttm_object: Demote half-assed headers and fix-up another
drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_thp: Add description for 'vmw_thp_manager's member
'manager'
drm/vmwgfx/ttm_object: Reorder header to immediately precede its
struct
.../drm/amd/display/dc/bios/command_table.c | 16 +-
.../gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/calcs/dce_calcs.c | 1151 +
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/dce/dce_aux.h |1 -
.../drm/amd/display/dc/dce80/dce80_resource.c | 16 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_display.c |3 -
drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv04/crtc.c |4 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv50/disp.c | 10 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv50/headc57d.c |2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.c |4 -
drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_display.c |8 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_ioc32.c |4 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_svm.c |5 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv50_display.h|3 -
.../gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/e
