Hi Jani, On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 01:17:35PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Tue, 11 Oct 2022, Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, 11 Oct 2022, Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 04:31:28PM +0200, Andi Shyti wrote: > >>> On Thu, Oct 06, 2022 at 10:48:44PM +0200, Andrzej Hajda wrote: > >>> > drm_device pointers are unwelcome. > >>> > > >>> > Signed-off-by: Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda@xxxxxxxxx> > >>> > >>> Acked-by: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> Reviewed-by: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> Only this first patch is strictly related to display, I'm taking > >> the series in intel-gt-next. Anyone against? > > > > Absolutely against. That logic is backwards. > > > > drm-intel-gt-next is for stuff that's strictly about gt/gem. Everything > > else, especially stuff touching common code, needs to go through > > drm-intel-next. > > > > There's nothing here that's gt/gem specific. > > To elaborate on this, we can do drm-intel-next -> drm-intel-gt-next > cross-merges. Not vice versa. > > If you merge code to drm-intel-gt-next that other work in drm-intel-next > depends on, we'll need a drm-intel-gt-next pull request to drm-next and > a backmerge from drm-next to drm-intel-next. And that creates a > dependency outside of drm-intel.git, as well as potentially several > weeks' delay when drm-next is not open for pull requests. Thanks for the explanation... I'm still learning here :) Will push in drm-intel-next, then. Thanks, Andi
