On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 04:41:10PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Thu, 10 Apr 2014, Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 09:31:39AM +0530, S, Deepak wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 4/10/2014 1:30 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > >> > On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 12:42:42AM +0530, S, Deepak wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> On 4/9/2014 10:23 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > >> >>> On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 06:05:27PM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > >> >>>> On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 02:30:52PM +0000, S, Deepak wrote: > >> >>>>> Hi Ville, > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> I am Ok with cleaning up and pushing the Code. Can you please tell me > >> >>>>> when we need to start pushing the code and branch to use > >> >>>>> (drm-intel-next)? > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Well you can consider it pushed now that it's in the open. The patches > >> >>>> just need a bit of extra polish I think. Well, unless you're planning > >> >>>> a full blown rewrite of the code ;) > >> >>>> > >> >>>> I guess you need to take into consideration whatever bdw rc6/rps patches > >> >>>> are still in flight, but since you've been doing some review there I > >> >>>> think you have a better idea than I do how things are progressing. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> I always work on top of nightly, so I guess that's a good choice :) > >> >>> > >> >>> Yes, -nightly is always the recommended branch to base upstream patches > >> >>> on. I'll sort out the conflict mess (or well, try to) if it doesn't apply > >> >>> to plain dinq or some other branch. drm-intel-next tends to be too > >> >>> outdated ;-) > >> >>> -Daniel > >> >> > >> >> Hi Daniel/Ville. > >> >> > >> >> Some of the patches are lined up for squashing right? So you want me > >> >> to work on this patches to align to upstream code and resubmit it to > >> >> same email thread? > >> > > >> > Hm, I expect this chv thread to become a bit mess really quickly tbh ;-) > >> > And since we don't have chv merged yet there's not really a baseline to do > >> > this on top. > >> > > >> > I guess the simplest approach would be for you to grab ville's chv tree, > >> > squash in the patches as discussed and then just starting on polishing > >> > your chv patches. Then as I pull in patches from this series you can drop > >> > them from yours. A bit messy, but I don't see any other approach really. > >> > > >> > Note that a pile of people are signed up to review this, so maybe hold off > >> > a bit until the review for your patches have been done. > >> > -Daniel > >> > >> Thanks Daniel. > >> Ville can you please share your chv tree details? > > > > I rebased the lot and pushed here: > > git://gitorious.org/vsyrjala/linux.git chv_rebase > > /me being lazy, did you squash/reorder patches, i.e. do the patch # > assignments [1] for review still apply? The numbers would get shifted around a bit due to two these two patches already getting merged: drm/i915/chv: IS_BROADWELL() should not be true for Cherryview drm/i915/chv: Add IS_CHERRYVIEW() macro And this patch got dropped as it no longer applies: drm/i915/chv: Add plane C support Apart from that no reordering/squashing. > > Jani. > > > [1] http://mid.gmane.org/20140410110857.GW18465@xxxxxxxxx > > > > > -- > > Ville Syrjälä > > Intel OTC > > _______________________________________________ > > Intel-gfx mailing list > > Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx > > -- > Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center -- Ville Syrjälä Intel OTC _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
