Hi Luben, On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 09:27:58AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 09:11:43AM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 06:46:21PM -0500, Luben Tuikov wrote: > > > On 2023-11-13 22:08, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > > BTW, cherry picking commits does not avoid conflicts - in fact it can > > > > cause conflicts if there are further changes to the files affected by > > > > the cherry picked commit in either the tree/branch the commit was > > > > cheery picked from or the destination tree/branch (I have to deal with > > > > these all the time when merging the drm trees in linux-next). Much > > > > better is to cross merge the branches so that the patch only appears > > > > once or have a shared branches that are merged by any other branch that > > > > needs the changes. > > > > > > > > I understand that things are not done like this in the drm trees :-( > > > > > > Hi Stephen, > > > > > > Thank you for the clarification--understood. I'll be more careful in the future. > > > Thanks again! :-) > > > > In this case, the best thing to do would indeed have been to ask the > > drm-misc maintainers to merge drm-misc-fixes into drm-misc-next. > > > > We're doing that all the time, but we're not ubiquitous so you need to > > ask us :) > > > > Also, dim should have caught that when you pushed the branch. Did you > > use it? > > Yeah dim must be used, exactly to avoid these issues. Both for applying > patches (so not git am directly, or cherry-picking from your own > development branch), and for pushing. The latter is even checked for by > the server (dim sets a special push flag which is very long and contains a > very clear warning if you bypass it). > > If dim was used, this would be a bug in the dim script that we need to > fix. It would be very useful for you to explain what happened here so we improve the tooling or doc and can try to make sure it doesn't happen again Maxime
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
