Hi Laurent, (snip) > > I will send a new patch with these changes after I tested it. Is it possible > > that improved patch lands on 4.17 and 4.14 stable versions? What is the > > process to propose a patch to a stable release ? > > The process is pretty simple, it's documented in > Documentation/process/stable- > kernel-rules.rst. The file states the following requirement for a patch to be > eligible for stable backporting: > > - It must fix a problem that causes a build error (but not for things > marked CONFIG_BROKEN), an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real > security issue, or some "oh, that's not good" issue. In short, something > critical > > I'll let you decide whether this patch qualifies, as it could be argued that > it implements a new feature. > > -- > Regards, > > Laurent Pinchart > > IMHO, it is not a new feature, but It is a bug. Because explicit fencing is a recent kernel feature. As Daniel Vetter stated, most X and wayland setups still rely on implicit fencing. Anyway this patch must be integrated first to Linus' tree, before I can propose to the stable release. It would be great if it can be part of 4.17. Best Regards, Emre Ucan _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
