missing signoff on drm-intel-gt-next pull

[Dave Airlie]

On Wed, 11 Aug 2021 at 17:11, Jani Nikula <jani.nikula at linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 11 Aug 2021, Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen at linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > Quoting Dave Airlie (2021-08-11 06:48:39)
> >> dim: db47fe727e1f ("drm/i915/step:
> >> s/<platform>_revid_tbl/<platform>_revids"): committer Signed-off-by
> >> missing.
> >>
> >> I'm not sure how much pain it is to fix that up, but
> >> commit db47fe727e1fc516cf60fc9ab8299605ef3c2d54
> >> Author: Anusha Srivatsa <anusha.srivatsa at intel.com>
> >> Commit: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper at intel.com>
> >>
> >>     drm/i915/step: s/<platform>_revid_tbl/<platform>_revids
> >>
> >>     Simplify the stepping info array name.
> >>
> >>     Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula at linux.intel.com>
> >>     Signed-off-by: Anusha Srivatsa <anusha.srivatsa at intel.com>
> >>     Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula at intel.com>
> >>     Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20210713193635.3390052-2-matthew.d.roper@intel.com
> >>
> >> It's definitely missing an S-o-b by anyone who handled the patch.
> >>
> >> Let me know if it's insanely painful to fix that.
> >
> > Added you to the earlier mail thread that discussed the incident.
> >
> > There are now 277 patches on top of that patch, so means rebasing all of
> > those and changing the hashes and trying to fixup all the Fixes:.
> >
> > So it's painful but not insanely so. Let me know if you want the tree
> > rebased.
> >
> > Regards, Joonas
>
> The commit came in via a topic branch also to drm-intel-next, so that's
> another 168 commits to rebase. There's a lot of people working on top of
> those trees, so I'm leaning on the very painful side.

Okay I think we can let that one slide. Having an S-o-b by someone in
the org on it is also technically enough for legal purposes anyways.

I'll finish the pulls from both trees tomorrow.

Thanks,
Dave.