On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 02:08:59AM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 1:59 AM Nícolas F. R. A. Prado
> <nfraprado@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 04:19:51PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 11:07:34AM -0400, Nícolas F. R. A. Prado wrote:
> > > > I noticed that there are some commits from drm-misc-next [1] that haven't been
> > > > added to the for-linux-next [2] branch, and consequently haven't made their way
> > > > into linux-next.
> > > >
> > > > Namely, commit bf0390e2c95b ("drm/panel: add samsung s6e3fa7 panel driver") and
> > > > commit 2689b33b8864 ("dt-bindings: display: panel-simple-dsi: add s6e3fa7
> > > > ams559nk06 compat") which have been applied almost a month ago [3].
> > > >
> > > > I noticed because running 'make dtbs_check' on today's next is showing new
> > > > warnings, but with these commits applied there shouldn't be any warning.
> > > >
> > > > Could you please take a look? I'm guessing a merge was forgotten somewhere along
> > > > the line on the for-linux-next branch.
> > >
> > > Those commits are in drm-misc-next which is now targetting the 6.10
> > > merge window. In order not to disrupt the oncoming 6.9 release though,
> > > drm-misc-next is removed from the for-next branch, it will be
> > > reintroduced after 6.9-rc1.
> > >
> > > Maxime
> >
> > I see. I didn't realize that's how drm-misc-next worked.
> >
> > Interestingly enough, the reason why this happened is because the for-next
> > branch on the qcom tree [1] also includes changes that are queued for 6.10. So
> > it seems that every subsystem has a different view of whether linux-next should
> > include only changes for the next (or current) merge window (6.9 in this case),
> > or if it should also include changes for the following merge window (6.10 in
> > this case). The end result is that in the time period leading to, and during,
> > the merge window, linux-next might be in an inconsistent state - it's neither a
> > snapshot for this release's rc1, nor a snapshot for the rc1 of the following
> > release. This seems to me to partially defeat the purpose of linux-next, so I
> > wonder if it's just a matter of better documenting the expectations for
> > linux-next.
>
> AFAIK 6.10 material should not be included in -next until after the merge
> window has closed. If they are including it then they are doing it wrong.
+CC QCOM folks
Indeed I was just pointed out by a colleague to this message from Stephen
clearly stating linux-next should only contain commits for v6.9. [1]
QCOM folks: FYI there are commits scheduled for 6.10 in your for-next branch,
which is not supposed to happen according to Stephen.
Thanks,
Nícolas
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-next/20240319164505.485b3801@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
>
> ChenYu
>
> > Anyway, at least for now I'll keep in mind that linux-next can be inconsistent
> > when looking through future results.
> >
> > Thank you both for the insight.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nícolas
> >
> > [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/qcom/linux.git/log/?h=for-next
