On Fri, 19 Apr 2024, Maxime Ripard <mripard@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 03:35:55PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: >> On Thu, 04 Apr 2024, "Nautiyal, Ankit K" <ankit.k.nautiyal@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On 3/19/2024 3:16 PM, Maxime Ripard wrote: >> >> On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 04:37:58PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 11 Mar 2024, Mitul Golani <mitulkumar.ajitkumar.golani@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>>> An Adaptive-Sync-capable DP protocol converter indicates its >> >>>> support by setting the related bit in the DPCD register. This >> >>>> is valid for DP and edp as well. >> >>>> >> >>>> Computes AS SDP values based on the display configuration, >> >>>> ensuring proper handling of Variable Refresh Rate (VRR) >> >>>> in the context of Adaptive Sync. >> >>> [snip] >> >>> >> >>>> Mitul Golani (9): >> >>>> drm/dp: Add support to indicate if sink supports AS SDP >> >>>> drm: Add Adaptive Sync SDP logging >> >>> Maarten, Maxime, Thomas, ack for merging these two patches via >> >>> drm-intel-next? >> >> Ack >> >> >> >> Maxime >> > >> > Thanks for the patch, ack and reviews, pushed to drm-intel-next. >> >> This came up again today [1]. The acks absolutely must be recorded in >> the commit messages when pushing the patches. >> >> dim should complain about applying non-i915 patches without acks. > > It doesn't at the moment, this has bitten us a couple of times in > drm-misc too. See check_maintainer() that gets called from apply_patch() and dim_b4_shazam_branch(). It's of limited value, but it should complain while applying non-i915 patches. > I did a MR to address that that hasn't been reviewed yet: > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/maintainer-tools/-/merge_requests/40 Yeah, a more generic solution is needed, but I think we should unify with the above. BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel
