Re: [Freedreno] [PATCH v7 0/4] Add support for the eDP panel over aux_bus

[Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@quicinc.com>]

On 4/14/2022 1:03 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On 14/04/2022 23:00, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
>> Hi Dmitry
>>
>> On 4/14/2022 12:43 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>> Quoting Dmitry Baryshkov (2022-04-14 12:20:31)
>>>> On 14/04/2022 19:40, Doug Anderson wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 5:19 AM Sankeerth Billakanti
>>>>> <quic_sbillaka@quicinc.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This series adds support for generic eDP panel over aux_bus.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These changes are dependent on the following series:
>>>>>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-msm/list/?series=613654&state=* 
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You're basically depending on the last two patches of that series.
>>>>> What's the plan there? In patchwork they're marked as "Not
>>>>> Applicable". If they're good to go, maybe we should land them? If not,
>>>>> maybe you should include them (with Dmitry as the author, of course)
>>>>> at the beginning of your series?
>>>>
>>>> No, please do not resend patches. The patches in question are marked as
>>>> 'Not applicable' as they are really not applicable to Bjorn's tree.
>>>> It would be better to point to the correct patchwork:
>>>>
>>>> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/98585/
>>>>
>>>> Note those patches still lack the R-B tag. I can include them anyway,
>>>> basing on Sankeerth's Tested-by tag, but the formal R-B would also 
>>>> be good.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Can you resend those as not RFC?
>>
>> Yes, please resend these, I can ack them.
>>
>> Previously I held off my ack, as kuogee ran into some issues testing 
>> them which was later concluded to be a mismatch in QC internal trees 
>> due to different versions of the changes.( another reason why we 
>> should get these landed ).
>>
>> Now, that Sankeerth has tested these, if you can remove RFC and post 
>> them, I can ack the.
> 
> Well, you can ack those patches without them being resent. You have 
> already added your Reviewed-by to first three patches (which were merged 
> during last window).
> 
I thought you might have to rebase them :) that way you could have 
resent the rebased patch with the RFC tag removed.

If you dont, you now have my R-b.

Thanks

Abhinav
>