Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] drm/gud: Use the shadow plane helper

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Dec 01, 2022 at 11:00:44AM +0100, Noralf Trønnes wrote:
> 
> 
> Den 01.12.2022 06.55, skrev Greg KH:
> > On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 08:26:48PM +0100, Noralf Trønnes via B4 Submission Endpoint wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I have started to look at igt for testing and want to use CRC tests. To
> >> implement support for this I need to move away from the simple kms
> >> helper.
> >>
> >> When looking around for examples I came across Thomas' nice shadow
> >> helper and thought, yes this is perfect for drm/gud. So I'll switch to
> >> that before I move away from the simple kms helper.
> >>
> >> The async framebuffer flushing code path now uses a shadow buffer and
> >> doesn't touch the framebuffer when it shouldn't. I have also taken the
> >> opportunity to inline the synchronous flush code path and make this the
> >> default flushing stategy.
> >>
> >> Noralf.
> >>
> >> Cc: Maxime Ripard <mripard@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Cc: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@xxxxxxx>
> >> Cc: dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Signed-off-by: Noralf Trønnes <noralf@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>
> >> ---
> >> Changes in v2:
> >> - Drop patch (Thomas):
> >>   drm/gem: shadow_fb_access: Prepare imported buffers for CPU access
> >> - Use src as variable name for iosys_map (Thomas)
> >> - Prepare imported buffer for CPU access in the driver (Thomas)
> >> - New patch: make sync flushing the default (Thomas)
> >> - Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221122-gud-shadow-plane-v1-0-9de3afa3383e@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > 
> > <formletter>
> > 
> > This is not the correct way to submit patches for inclusion in the
> > stable kernel tree.  Please read:
> >     https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html
> > for how to do this properly.
> > 
> > </formletter>
> 
> Care to elaborate?
> Is it because stable got the whole patchset and not just the one fix
> patch that cc'ed stable?

That is what triggered this, yes.

> This patchset was sent using the b4 tool and I can't control this
> aspect. Everyone mentioned in the patches gets the whole set.

Fair enough, but watch out, bots will report this as being a problem as
they can't always read through all patches in a series to notice this...

thanks,

greg k-h



[Index of Archives]     [Linux DRI Users]     [Linux Intel Graphics]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux