Re: [PATCH RFC v1 00/52] drm/crtc: Rename struct drm_crtc::dev to drm_dev

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 01:02:53PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > Background is that this makes merge conflicts easier to handle and detect.
> Really?

FWIW, I agree with Christian here.

> Each file (apart from include/drm/drm_crtc.h) is only touched once. So
> unless I'm missing something you don't get less or easier conflicts by
> doing it all in a single patch. But you gain the freedom to drop a
> patch for one driver without having to drop the rest with it.

Not really, because the last patch removed the union anyway. So you have
to revert both the last patch, plus that driver one. And then you need
to add a TODO to remove that union eventually.

> So I still like the split version better, but I'm open to a more
> verbose reasoning from your side.

You're doing only one thing here, really: you change the name of a
structure field. If it was shared between multiple maintainers, then
sure, splitting that up is easier for everyone, but this will go through
drm-misc, so I can't see the benefit it brings.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Virtualization]     [Linux Virtualization]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]     [Monitors]