On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 at 11:49, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, 12 Mar 2024 at 21:07, Dave Airlie <airlied@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > I've done a trial merge into your tree from a few hours ago, there > > are definitely some slighty messy conflicts, I've pushed a sample > > branch here: > > I appreciate your sample merges since I like verifying my end result, > but I think your merge is wrong. > > I got two differences when I did the merge. The one in > intel_dp_detect() I think is just syntactic - I ended up placing the > > if (!intel_dp_is_edp(intel_dp)) > intel_psr_init_dpcd(intel_dp); > > differently than you did (I did it *after* the tunnel_detect()). > > I don't _think,_ that placement matters, but somebody more familiar > with the code should check it out. Added Animesh and Jani to the > participants. > > But I think your merge gets the TP_printk() for the xe_bo_move trace > event is actively wrong. You don't have the destination for the move > in the printk. > > Or maybe I got it wrong. Our merges end up _close_, but not identical. You are right, I lost a line there, I've repushed mine just for prosperity with that fixed. The other one I'm not sure on and will defer to the i915 maintainers if ordering matters. Dave.
