[PATCH v4 0/3] Enhanced EDID quirk functionality

[Paul Menzel]

Dear Ian,


thank you very much for your quick iterations. Hopefully the developers
will review this on Monday.

Am Sonntag, den 12.08.2012, 15:07 -0500 schrieb Ian Pilcher:
> Another rev.  I figured out how to use git reset --hard and --soft to
> make regenerating the patch series a bit easier.  (It helped a ton
> that all of the later changes are isolated in a single file.)

Definitely. Wasn’t `git add -p` helpful?

> I still feel like I'm probably missing an easier way to go back a fix
> a simple type, however.

Have you heard of `git rebase` already. That is the more complex version
of `git commit --amend`.

If the typo is in the last commit just do make the change and do `git
commit --amend -a`.

If you want to change some earlier commit (like 2 ahead), either do the
fix, commit it and do `git rebase -i HEAD~3` and reorder the commits to
put the fix at the correct place and change `pick` to `f` for fix up.

Or do `git rebase -i HEAD~3` and choose the commits you need to edit and
then commit these changes with `git commit -a --amend`.

> * Fix typo
> 
> * Split adding new quirk flags and adding new quirk into separate
>   patches
> 
> After reveiwing stable_kernel_rules.txt, I don't think that these
> patches are appropriate for -stable.  I don't consider it to be
> "obviously correct," and it certainly isn't less than 100 lines.
> Thus, I'm not going to submit this for inclusion in -stable.

Hmm, three things.

1. I would try anyway. The stable maintainer will reject it if they
think it is not appropriate.

2. Your last quirk should be back ported. One solution would be, you
first submit patches to add the quirks and the monitor and then add the
functionality.

3. I also need to add two monitors to the quirk list which need to be
backported. If I try to get them in before yours, you would have to
rebase your patches again.

Also likely future quirks would need to be backported in a complicated
way.

So I vote for getting this into stable and hopefully the maintainers
agree.


Thanks,

Paul
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/attachments/20120812/d7c74bad/attachment.pgp>