Message ID | 9b365e76-e346-f813-d750-d7cfd0d16e4e@gmail.com |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
Series | [GIT,PULL] soc: mediatek: updates for v5.6 | expand |
Hi, On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 2:18 AM Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Olof, > Hi ARnds, > > Please have a look on the following patches for mediatek soc drivers for v5.6 > > I includes the stable branch v5.5-next/cmdq-stable which should also be merged > in the DRM tree. I'm not very familiar with providing a stable tree, although I > double-checked that in the pull request to the DRM tree the commit IDs are the > same, I thought it is worth noting. I'm a little confused as to how the dependencies are expected to line up here. Does your non-DRM contents rely on the DRM pieces? If so, you need them to be based on top of that branch to make sure they are bisectable, not merge the DRM branch in on top (since a bisect might land on a commit before the merge). But... I also don't see how there's any actual dependency here? There are a few cleanups, the DRM branch builds without them, and the branch when checked out right before the DRM merge in your pull request, also builds. -Olof
On 17/01/2020 20:22, Olof Johansson wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 2:18 AM Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Olof, >> Hi ARnds, >> >> Please have a look on the following patches for mediatek soc drivers for v5.6 >> >> I includes the stable branch v5.5-next/cmdq-stable which should also be merged >> in the DRM tree. I'm not very familiar with providing a stable tree, although I >> double-checked that in the pull request to the DRM tree the commit IDs are the >> same, I thought it is worth noting. > > I'm a little confused as to how the dependencies are expected to line up here. > > Does your non-DRM contents rely on the DRM pieces? If so, you need > them to be based on top of that branch to make sure they are > bisectable, not merge the DRM branch in on top (since a bisect might > land on a commit before the merge). No, it's the other way round. DRM relies on the four patches I took from Bibby Hsieh. They are part of v5.5-next/cmdq-stable and this branch was merged into v5.5-next/soc as well as in Ck Hu's DRM branch. My understanding is that Ck Hu sends pull requests to the DRM branch. > > But... I also don't see how there's any actual dependency here? There > are a few cleanups, the DRM branch builds without them, and the branch > when checked out right before the DRM merge in your pull request, also > builds. > The patches add some helper functions like cmdq_dev_get_client_reg on which the DRM branch from Ck Hu depends [1]. Hope that clarifies your questions. Regards, Matthias [1] https://github.com/ckhu-mediatek/linux.git-tags/commits/mediatek-drm-next-5.6
On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 1:52 PM Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On 17/01/2020 20:22, Olof Johansson wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 2:18 AM Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> Hi Olof, > >> Hi ARnds, > >> > >> Please have a look on the following patches for mediatek soc drivers for v5.6 > >> > >> I includes the stable branch v5.5-next/cmdq-stable which should also be merged > >> in the DRM tree. I'm not very familiar with providing a stable tree, although I > >> double-checked that in the pull request to the DRM tree the commit IDs are the > >> same, I thought it is worth noting. > > > > I'm a little confused as to how the dependencies are expected to line up here. > > > > Does your non-DRM contents rely on the DRM pieces? If so, you need > > them to be based on top of that branch to make sure they are > > bisectable, not merge the DRM branch in on top (since a bisect might > > land on a commit before the merge). > > No, it's the other way round. DRM relies on the four patches I took from Bibby > Hsieh. They are part of v5.5-next/cmdq-stable and this branch was merged into > v5.5-next/soc as well as in Ck Hu's DRM branch. My understanding is that Ck Hu > sends pull requests to the DRM branch. Ah, ok -- in that case there's no need to bring in the DRM branch to your contents here, they'll merge them at their end. It doesn't do any harm (besides adding dependencies that aren't strictly needed), but we usually avoid doing it. > > But... I also don't see how there's any actual dependency here? There > > are a few cleanups, the DRM branch builds without them, and the branch > > when checked out right before the DRM merge in your pull request, also > > builds. > > > > The patches add some helper functions like cmdq_dev_get_client_reg on which the > DRM branch from Ck Hu depends [1]. > > Hope that clarifies your questions. Yeah, ok -- merging. -Olof