From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 572695CDD0 for ; Thu, 14 Mar 2024 08:34:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.10 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710405258; cv=none; b=LRmwbXtCYQJ3/8A7Cp40oUxKe/St2PHfPcdsCMoMAfTDAlptH7FmjGpBMrZpU5NK/h1chwYmQYF74z0f4fcnj4h2cQSAJTpcEAbMzU+i67g/dUW/lw7H6yJKGQ4et7g2KEu6aLbqtS+W9/i4RYnCgG0v3fScBHGhRBzXJlQi3II= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710405258; c=relaxed/simple; bh=qd4eqTBkHcwbLo7eSV2Kedg+vbWdERUbOG59W19P5oY=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=uDOLM4/9vjY5fX9w6NHvAB9CGPfmTZceCPhjE2VSjEe9H2EbkGkc3AFJW8iFEhxcSnDMH0ItER8bAcXvVsiWw3N4jsv+9n7zbZTLymIZaoOzlbOumKGf4LJU6uPbtqZ60iiAAPy0eoO1UPq77gkDr/jsW4BhYVCQBILzAnTRIqk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=Nnw0sE2w; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.10 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="Nnw0sE2w" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1710405256; x=1741941256; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date: message-id:mime-version; bh=qd4eqTBkHcwbLo7eSV2Kedg+vbWdERUbOG59W19P5oY=; b=Nnw0sE2w5WgLU+U9KmeF5rShXpeSoUEeIQ57MOzzS6IRowS5H+7JEUNM gRy3xaxbna2fO0BYWYeBx6nF9q3hBUO6M6NLyORLR+dCy8DdYF4Ka5LUb XoBadCjDWwWVXdwi1F91+Mvqc43HOuZcJivvtO0K10mv0XKCVZB2cN/Ks XQ9xhVwcqUnEsOCR+NbnXg4CZ2RLKPv6laPCXd5rqt3NyK8lP9xMhevMd iZcobWkCx0jn4f8ZdAlPZ4T74zYDkaIG2aZDn9JvUJrRBvjar8gv/XtpS ksM/TeZYAIT5Xo1uk+IIrRhf7Ki/KNUDmLeyinfSq0gXRFIldNj85nQg5 g==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,11012"; a="22669292" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.07,124,1708416000"; d="scan'208";a="22669292" Received: from orviesa007.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.147]) by orvoesa102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 Mar 2024 01:34:15 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.07,124,1708416000"; d="scan'208";a="12669113" Received: from rboza-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.252.53.139]) by orviesa007-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 Mar 2024 01:34:13 -0700 From: Jani Nikula To: Dave Airlie , Linus Torvalds Cc: Animesh Manna , Daniel Vetter , dri-devel , LKML Subject: Re: [git pull] drm for 6.9-rc1 In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo References: Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 10:34:10 +0200 Message-ID: <87zfv1qkjh.fsf@intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Thu, 14 Mar 2024, Dave Airlie wrote: > On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 at 11:49, Linus Torvalds > wrote: >> >> On Tue, 12 Mar 2024 at 21:07, Dave Airlie wrote: >> > >> > I've done a trial merge into your tree from a few hours ago, there >> > are definitely some slighty messy conflicts, I've pushed a sample >> > branch here: >> >> I appreciate your sample merges since I like verifying my end result, >> but I think your merge is wrong. >> >> I got two differences when I did the merge. The one in >> intel_dp_detect() I think is just syntactic - I ended up placing the >> >> if (!intel_dp_is_edp(intel_dp)) >> intel_psr_init_dpcd(intel_dp); >> >> differently than you did (I did it *after* the tunnel_detect()). >> >> I don't _think,_ that placement matters, but somebody more familiar >> with the code should check it out. Added Animesh and Jani to the >> participants. >> >> But I think your merge gets the TP_printk() for the xe_bo_move trace >> event is actively wrong. You don't have the destination for the move >> in the printk. >> >> Or maybe I got it wrong. Our merges end up _close_, but not identical. > > You are right, I lost a line there, I've repushed mine just for > prosperity with that fixed. > > The other one I'm not sure on and will defer to the i915 maintainers > if ordering matters. I don't think the ordering matters, but Linus' solution matches what we have in our -next, and has been tested. BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel