[Intel-gfx] Forced push done to drm-intel-next-queued

[Hans de Goede]

Hi,

On 27-12-18 15:42, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Dec 2018, Hans de Goede <hdegoede at redhat.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> As mentioned in the "I messed up drm-intel-next-queued!" mail-thread
>> I made a big mistake yesterday:
>>
>> "Ugh, I just messed up drm-intel-next-queued big time.
>>
>> I somehow rebased my work on top of drm-tip (I believe I did the rebase
>> in the wrong dir) and then after running a bunch of tests I
>> did a "dim push-branch drm-intel-next-queued" which pushed the
>> patches I intended to push rebased on top of drm-tip
>> pushing drm-tip to dinq :(
>>
>> I'm so sorry about this.
>>
>> I just checked my reflog and the last commit before me messing
>> up is commit d4de753526f4d99f541f1b6ed1d963005c09700c
>> ("drm/i915: Unwind failure on pinning the gen7 ppgtt")"
>>
>> To fix this I've just done a forced push resetting
>> drm-intel-next-queued to the mentioned d4de753526f4 commit.
>>
>> I first checked no-one pushed anything on top of my mess,
>> but if you pushed anything to drm-intel-next-queued in the
>> last 24 hours, please double-check it is there.
>>
>> Once more my apologies for this.
> 
> It happens, don't worry about it. Thanks for being open about it instead
> of trying to brush it under the rug.

Thanks.

> Did you pass -f to dim? I suspect drm-tip wouldn't pass the push checks
> in dim without it. Perhaps we'll need to add more.

No I did not pass -f, I did wonder myself how the push managed to
proceed after my screw-up. Looking at how dim builds drm-tip, it seems
it starts with dinq and then merges in other branches, so a push
from a drm-tip based branch to dinq is a fast-forward (I think),
so dinq is special in this case.

> Anyway, checking against what I had on Friday, I think it all checks
> out. It's of course possible something was pushed on top, but I doubt
> it.

Great, thank you for double checking.

Regards,

Hans