On Mon, 16 Mar 2015, Xi Ruoyao <xry111@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 03/16/2015 at 10:30 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi Dave,
>>
>> Today's linux-next merge of the drm tree got a conflict in
>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c between commit 2dccc9898d45
>> ("drm/i915: Ensure plane->state->fb stays in sync with plane->fb") from
>> the drm-intel-fixes tree and commit afd65eb4cc05 ("drm/i915: Ensure
>> plane->state->fb stays in sync with plane->fb"), f55548b5af87
>> ("drm/i915: Don't try to reference the fb in
>> get_initial_plane_config()") and presumably others from the drm tree.
>>
>> Same patch summary, different authors, committers and added function.
>>
>> I fixed it up (I effectively used the drm tree version) and can carry
>> the fix as necessary (no action is required).
>>
> My patch with commit 2dccc9898d45 is for Linux 4.0-rcN. It has no
> relationship
> with linux-next since Matt Roper's afd65eb4cc05 has solved this long
> long ago.
The relationship is that -next will eventually merge to Linus' master,
so Matt's commit will conflict with yours. Your commit is taking the
fast path to the kernel. But you don't have to worry about it, it's all
taken care of. And per what Stephen says, he has done the right thing.
> BTW, there is still one thing should be done in linux-next. We should
> change
> Matt's update_state_fb to use drm_atomic_set_fb_for_plane since the logic of
> Matt's code is duplicated with drm_atomic_set_fb_for_plane.
Patches welcome in intel-gfx list; the audience here is too wide. ;)
BR,
Jani.
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
