On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 10:24:41AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 2:03 AM, Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au wrote:
Hi Daniel,
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 09:24:49 +0200 Daniel Vetter daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch 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.
Hey, I was amazed that you all acked it, and it's why I required that you do so before I took it :)
Good luck with the merges!
greg k-h