On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 2:03 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 09:24:49 +0200 Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> How are we going to handle this now? The refactor is deeply burried in >> drm-misc, I guess you could cherry-pick the relevant patches over. But >> that'll probably lead to more conflicts because git will get confused. > > I'll just keep applying the merge resolution patch and will remind Dave > and Greg about it during the week before the merge window opens so that > they can let Linus know that the fix up is needed. Well, Greg squeezed the vbox driver into -rc2, so now we already get to resolve this in a backmerge. And hopefully the bikeshed patches in -staging won't interfere too badly with whatever refactoring we'll do in drm-next. Greg, fyi this is the last time I'll ack a drm driver for staging. This just doesn't work. We're spending more time here working the -staging vs. drm-next conflicts than the actual vbox driver review has taken me. And probly less than the cleanup for merging directly to drm-next will end up taking. Thanks, Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
