From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PULL] drm-intel-next
Date: Wed, 07 May 2014 09:38:47 +0300
Message-ID: <87eh06qeiw.fsf@intel.com>
References: <20140428132613.GA2368@phenom.ffwll.local>
 <5368DED4.5050401@t-online.de> <87k39zqbju.fsf@intel.com>
 <20140506185210.GA5730@phenom.ffwll.local> <53694041.6010409@t-online.de>
 <20140506201715.GG5730@phenom.ffwll.local>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org>
In-Reply-To: <20140506201715.GG5730@phenom.ffwll.local>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
 <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
 <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org
Sender: "Intel-gfx" <intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org>
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>, Knut Petersen <Knut_Petersen@t-online.de>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
List-Id: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org

On Tue, 06 May 2014, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 10:04:17PM +0200, Knut Petersen wrote:
>> On 06.05.2014 20:59, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> >On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 04:30:45PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> >>On Tue, 06 May 2014, Knut Petersen <Knut_Petersen@t-online.de> wrote:
>> >>>On 28.04.2014 15:26, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> >>>The patch below is a clear candidate for 3.15 as it fixes a regression introduced after 3.14
>> >>>>Egbert Eich (1):
>> >>>>        drm/i915/SDVO: For sysfs link put directory and target in correct order
>> >>Daniel, want me to pick that for -fixes?
>> >Yeah I geuss so. People never complained that the link isn't there, us
>> >adding it for one kernel release to the wrong place doesn't really sound
>> >too bothersome.
>> >
>> >But if this unbreaks a system somewhere then it makes sense to apply to
>> >-fixes.
>> >
>> >Knut, how exactly does your system blow up?
>> Well, it's only the warning generated at boot time that would irritate users.
>> As a patch is known and tested it's probably a good idea to fix it before
>> people complain to lkml and bugzilla.
>
> Ah, I didn't realize there's a warning, I've thought only the symlink goes
> the wrong way. In that case it's good to go for -fixes.

Done.

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center