On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 3:40 AM, Michel Dänzer <michel at daenzer.net> wrote: > > On 16/08/17 09:35 AM, Felix Kuehling wrote: > > On 2017-08-15 06:20 AM, Oded Gabbay wrote: > >> I prefer to do it incrementally, to avoid very large patch-sets which > >> usually end up in longer cycles of review-fix, which causes you more > >> pain because internal development continues during this time and you > >> need to keep everything synchronized. If you do it in small pieces, > >> there is more chance it will get to upstream faster and then you can > >> cross it off your list permanently and no longer worry about it not > >> being synchronized with internal development. > >> > >> If you are talking about the current patch-set (you actually sent 2 > >> patch-sets), then once you rebase them on the branches I mentioned, > >> they are more or less good to go (except from very small fixes we > >> talked about). If you can do it during this week, I think we can make > >> it for the 4.14 merge window. > >> > >> Does that make sense ? > > > > Sounds good. I'm hoping to get a bit more into 4.14. We'll see how it > > goes. I've probably been told before but forgot: What's Dave Airlie's > > deadline for accepting patches into 4.14? > > The deadline is usually around -rc6 of the previous cycle, so for 4.14 > it might be the end of this week (keep in mind that Dave's in Australia, > so his work day is over when yours starts). > Yeah, Michel is correct. If its 1 or 2 trivial patches I can probably get it in even during -rc7 or start of merge window, but for this large patch-set -rc5/6 is the safer way to go. Oded > > -- > Earthling Michel Dänzer | http://www.amd.com > Libre software enthusiast | Mesa and X developer
