Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 03:36:16PM +0200, Matthias Brugger wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 19/04/16 15:42, Philipp Zabel wrote:
>> >Hi Dave,
>> >
>> >please consider pulling this tag with initial MediaTek MT8173 DRM
>> >support, corresponding to v14 of the patch series. These patches have
>> >been mostly stable for the last few rounds. I'll follow up with the HDMI
>> >encoder support pending review of the latest version.
>> >
>>
>> Please don't pull
>> e34ba70de8c4 ("arm64: dts: mt8173: Add display subsystem related nodes")
>> If you pull the rest, this patch will go through my branch.
>
> So not on top of this at all, but do we have to split up arm drm drivers
> so much? Generally this stuff goes in through one tree with the driver,
> with acks from other subsystem as needed. That ack seems to be missing,
> but imo better to supply it and just get this pull req through. Or double
> merge a patch, we do that fairly often.
>
> Anyway just a comment, but sitting outside watching I think arm has a
> pretty serious problem with tree proliferation. And it's not helping to
> get fairly simple drivers like this one merged ...
DT changes do get merged through the arm DT tree separately. ARM has
absurd tree proliferation, but I think in this case it actually makes
sense. DT is the most common place I have merge conflicts when working
on platform enabling across the steaming piles of subsystem trees out
there, and keeping DT separate means that a merged -next tree can be
built sanely.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
