From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABC7EC433DB for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 16:25:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (gabe.freedesktop.org [131.252.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 34A1322B2B for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 16:25:01 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 34A1322B2B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68B7489948; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 16:25:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3427789938 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2021 16:25:00 +0000 (UTC) IronPort-SDR: xE1T+Q6JQ750rQ2D81ShkZy9kRAweIhf9TjX5SI0yvSNtL2vL013TFoW4BxmLt7OE+99j7+shY r+sGibQF28Iw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9862"; a="178216296" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.79,341,1602572400"; d="scan'208";a="178216296" Received: from fmsmga008.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.58]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 12 Jan 2021 08:24:58 -0800 IronPort-SDR: Xvd/ZDtf57z5HZNjvEsUvmABdlFkQXK5bq4e2DoLr8zhorSwwSZfKzvcd9V7CfLz+NXiqTfBe3 Zy1ryoRcfzBA== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.79,341,1602572400"; d="scan'208";a="353085737" Received: from vbucoci-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.249.39.237]) by fmsmga008-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 12 Jan 2021 08:24:55 -0800 From: Jani Nikula To: Lucas De Marchi , Matt Roper In-Reply-To: <20210111212553.brclyuex7dgzeryu@ldmartin-desk1> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo References: <20210108231853.2859646-1-aditya.swarup@intel.com> <20210108231853.2859646-2-aditya.swarup@intel.com> <20210108234440.GO3894148@mdroper-desk1.amr.corp.intel.com> <878s8zw7tw.fsf@intel.com> <875z43w7kq.fsf@intel.com> <20210111205743.GC4758@mdroper-desk1.amr.corp.intel.com> <20210111212553.brclyuex7dgzeryu@ldmartin-desk1> Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2021 18:24:50 +0200 Message-ID: <87o8hut965.fsf@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915/tgl: Use TGL stepping info for applying WAs X-BeenThere: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Intel graphics driver community testing & development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-gfx" On Mon, 11 Jan 2021, Lucas De Marchi wrote: > On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 12:57:43PM -0800, Matt Roper wrote: >>On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 10:18:45PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote: >>So to clarify, it looks like we have a bunch of revid changes to the >>display code that got merged to the gt-next tree but not to the >>intel-next tree? Should we be going back and also merging / >>cherry-picking those over to intel-next since that's where the display >>changes are supposed to go, or is it too late to do that cleanly at this >>point? > > it was my mistake to merge them to drm-intel-gt-next. They should have > been in drm-intel-next. That's not the problem though. The branches generally being too far apart atm is. The single cherry-pick won't solve that. Applying these patches to one tree just adds a dependency that will not be around in the topic branch baseline, creating a new problem for merging the topic branch. >>Going forward, what should the general strategy be for stuff like >>platform definitions and such? Merge such enablement patches to both > > last time we talked about this was regarding dg1 AFAIR and the consensus > was to create a topic branch and that topic branch to be merged in both > branches. That would avoid having 2 commits in different branches. Agreed. > Not sure if it would work out nicely for getting test on CI though. > Since the changes are spread through the codebase, we could very easily > hit a situation that this topic branch creates conflicts for other > patches getting merged on either drm-intel-next or drm-intel-gt-next. The cycle in review -> apply to topic branch -> merge topic branch just needs to be short enough. We can't have the topic branch laying around for more than maybe a few days, or we'll have problems. BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx