Quoting Dmitry Baryshkov (2022-04-06 03:21:25)
> On 06/04/2022 05:51, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> >
> > Is there any Fixes tag for this? Still seems worthwhile to have one even
> > if this is a lockdep warning.
> I thought about this before sending v1, but ended up not doing so. Each
> of these changes is not atomic. A call to drm_bridge_add() without final
> drm_bridge_remove() in the core msm code would leave dangling pointers
> in the drm core. A drm_bridge_remove() is not sensible without
> converting _all_ users.
>
> So there are two alternatives:
> - leave this patch series as is w/o a Fixes tag
> - squash four patches into a single patch and add 'Fixes: a3376e3ec81c
> ("drm/msm: convert to drm_bridge")' tag
>
The atomic change. That's because bisection could trip over these
patches and then break because it picked the middle of the patch series.
One atomic commit fixes that.
