On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 06:01:46PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 10:33:53AM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote: > > On Sat, 3 Aug 2019 at 20:47, Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Daniel, Dave, > > > > > > Here is the first (and pretty late) drm-misc-next PR. > > > > > > It's pretty big due to the lateness, but there's nothing really major > > > showing up. It's pretty much the usual bunch of reworks, fixes, and > > > new helpers being introduced. > > > > dim: 415d2e9e0757 ("Revert "drm/gem: Rename drm_gem_dumb_map_offset() > > to drm_gem_map_offset()""): mandatory review missing. > > dim: be855382bacb ("Revert "drm/panfrost: Use drm_gem_map_offset()""): > > mandatory review missing. > > dim: e4eee93d2577 ("drm/vgem: drop DRM_AUTH usage from the driver"): > > mandatory review missing. > > dim: 88209d2c5035 ("drm/msm: drop DRM_AUTH usage from the driver"): > > mandatory review missing. > > dim: ccdae4257569 ("drm/nouveau: remove open-coded drm_invalid_op()"): > > mandatory review missing. > > > > Pretty sure review in drm-misc-next is a rule. I don't even see acks > > on most of these. > > Ugh, sorry for that. I guess I'm still pretty new to the > maintainer-side of dim, which commands did you use to check that? dim apply-pull does this. If all committers use the tooling as they should they shouldn't be able to push patches which violate anything here, that's why dim request-pull doesn't reject. We're now working on patches to make sure you really have to use dim for managing drm-misc and applying patches. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx