On Mon, 14 Nov 2022, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, > > On 11/14/22 11:10, Jani Nikula wrote: >> On Mon, 14 Nov 2022, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> On 11/14/22 00:23, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> Today's linux-next merge of the drm-intel tree got a conflict in: >>>> >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_backlight.c >>>> >>>> between commit: >>>> >>>> b1d36e73cc1c ("drm/i915: Don't register backlight when another backlight should be used (v2)") >>>> >>>> from Linus' tree and commit: >>>> >>>> 801543b2593b ("drm/i915: stop including i915_irq.h from i915_trace.h") >>>> >>>> from the drm-intel tree. >>> >>> This is weird, because the: >>> >>> b1d36e73cc1c ("drm/i915: Don't register backlight when another backlight should be used (v2)") >>> >>> commit is in 6.1-rc1, so there can only be a conflict it 6.1-rc1 has not >>> been back-merged into drm-intel yet ? >> >> That's the reason it *is* a conflict, right? > > Right what I was trying to say is that I am surprised that 6.1-rc1 has not > been back-merged into drm-intel yet even though it has been released > 4 weeks ago. Right, -ENOCOFFEE at my end. > I thought it was more or less standard process to backmerge rc1 soon after > it is released ? The delay may be because v6.1-rc1 brought in more regressions for us than any other -rc1 in recent memory. Our CI's been suffering, and our folks have been spending a lot of time debugging, bisecting and reporting. (And before you ask, yes, we're going to be more proactive in reporting issues we find in linux-next.) That said, Rodrigo's been in charge of drm-intel-next this cycle, maybe it's time to backmerge drm-next? BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center