Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/doc: Allow new UAPI to be used once it's in the driver's -next.

From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
To: Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net>
Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Dave Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/doc: Allow new UAPI to be used once it's in the driver's -next.
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 21:35:48 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190424193548.GT9857@phenom.ffwll.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190424185617.16865-1-eric@anholt.net>

On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 11:56:16AM -0700, Eric Anholt wrote:
> I was trying to figure out if it was permissible to merge the Mesa
> side of V3D's CSD support yet while it's in drm-misc-next but not
> drm-next, and developers on #dri-devel IRC had differing opinions of
> what the requirement was.  Propose a clarification here to see if Dave
> Airlie agrees.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net>
> ---
> 
> Personally, I thought the rule was "has to be in drm-next", but
> assuming our review processes aren't totally broken, this should be
> enough.

Yeah if you end up with a revert on your hands the process failed much
harder and you get to keep the pieces no matter what. Not sure we should
clarify whether you need a stable sha1 or not (helps with cross
referencing uapi header updates), but imo good as is. And matches what
I've been doing/recommending past few years.

Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>

> 
>  Documentation/gpu/drm-uapi.rst | 5 +++--
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/gpu/drm-uapi.rst b/Documentation/gpu/drm-uapi.rst
> index c9fd23efd957..8e5545dfbf82 100644
> --- a/Documentation/gpu/drm-uapi.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/gpu/drm-uapi.rst
> @@ -92,8 +92,9 @@ leads to a few additional requirements:
>    requirements by doing a quick fork.
>  
>  - The kernel patch can only be merged after all the above requirements are met,
> -  but it **must** be merged **before** the userspace patches land. uAPI always flows
> -  from the kernel, doing things the other way round risks divergence of the uAPI
> +  but it **must** be merged to the driver's -next tree (as documented in
> +  MAINTAINERS) **before** the userspace patches land. uAPI always flows from
> +  the kernel, doing things the other way round risks divergence of the uAPI
>    definitions and header files.
>  
>  These are fairly steep requirements, but have grown out from years of shared
> -- 
> 2.20.1
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch