Re: [PATCH 0/9] drm: remove deprecated functions
On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 3:45 PM Linus Walleij wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 3:12 PM Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 10:17:13PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > > > > It was especially scary. > > > > > > But I think I managed to apply the patches and push the > > > branch now. > > > > Except when you're racing with someone else you should only see conflicts > > with stuff you've just pushed. Or if someone forgot to fix up their mess. > > What was the conflict? > > dim push-branches was complaining that one of the commits was > missing the proper committer sign-off, it was the bottom commit under > mine (IIRC "drm/atomic-helper: WARN if fake_commit->hw_done is not > completed as expected") > and dim update-branches seemed to rebase and fix up my patches > and then everything was fine. This sounds like you (or dim?) accidentaly amended that commit (which changes the committer and results in the warning), and a rebase would indeed have fixed that. If the first patch conflicts this can happen because dim apply-branch doesn't bail out correctly. Or at least did in the past, I recently fixed that in commit ee299e510ae468aab27610bcbc4fdd4de932f74b Author: Daniel Vetter Date: Wed Oct 17 08:53:00 2018 +0200 dim: make apply-patch fail again > I just felt slightly out of control :D If your dim didn't have the above commit and you had a conflict it's all explained. Otherwise I'm not sure what's been going on ... -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch ___ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
Re: [PATCH 0/9] drm: remove deprecated functions
On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 10:17:13PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 10:42 AM Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 11:38:35PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 11:17 PM Fernando Ramos
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > One of the things in the DRM TODO list ("Documentation/gpu/todo.rst")
> > > > was to
> > > > "switch from reference/unreference to get/put". That's what this patch
> > > > series is
> > > > about.
> > >
> > > The series:
> > > Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij
> >
> > Since your reviewed it all, and there's a pile of acks for the driver
> > parts too: Want to go ahead and apply it too?
>
> OK I did... the git was quirky, patches changes around
> under my feet and dim started to complain about problems
> with commits that weren't even mine.
>
> It was especially scary.
>
> But I think I managed to apply the patches and push the
> branch now.
Except when you're racing with someone else you should only see conflicts
with stuff you've just pushed. Or if someone forgot to fix up their mess.
What was the conflict? Looking at the git-rerere log I'm not exactly sure
what happened ... Looks like only one of the patches didn't apply cleanly
anymore because it was somewhat outdated. Otherwise nothing from you.
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
___
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
Re: [PATCH 0/9] drm: remove deprecated functions
On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 08:21:29PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> On Wednesday, 21 November 2018 11:42:33 EET Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 11:38:35PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 11:17 PM Fernando Ramos wrote:
> > >> One of the things in the DRM TODO list ("Documentation/gpu/todo.rst")
> > >> was to "switch from reference/unreference to get/put". That's what this
> > >> patch series is about.
> > >
> > > The series:
> > > Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij
> >
> > Since your reviewed it all, and there's a pile of acks for the driver
> > parts too: Want to go ahead and apply it too?
>
> Please remember to give at least a week to reviewers, especially with LPC
> last
> week.
I think for this undisputed cocci series waiting for everyone is not
needed. There's really not much the driver-specific reviewer perspective
would help here.
In general I do agree though, if there's something driver maintainers can
have better insight on.
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
___
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
Re: [PATCH 0/9] drm: remove deprecated functions
Hi Daniel,
On Wednesday, 21 November 2018 11:42:33 EET Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 11:38:35PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 11:17 PM Fernando Ramos wrote:
> >> One of the things in the DRM TODO list ("Documentation/gpu/todo.rst")
> >> was to "switch from reference/unreference to get/put". That's what this
> >> patch series is about.
> >
> > The series:
> > Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij
>
> Since your reviewed it all, and there's a pile of acks for the driver
> parts too: Want to go ahead and apply it too?
Please remember to give at least a week to reviewers, especially with LPC last
week.
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
___
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
Re: [PATCH 0/9] drm: remove deprecated functions
On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 11:38:35PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 11:17 PM Fernando Ramos
> wrote:
>
> > One of the things in the DRM TODO list ("Documentation/gpu/todo.rst") was to
> > "switch from reference/unreference to get/put". That's what this patch
> > series is
> > about.
>
> The series:
> Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij
Since your reviewed it all, and there's a pile of acks for the driver
parts too: Want to go ahead and apply it too?
Thanks, Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
___
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
