[Intel-gfx] [PULL] drm-misc-next

[Rob Herring]

On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 1:34 AM Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 2:34 AM Dave Airlie <airlied at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 3 Aug 2019 at 20:47, Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard at bootlin.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Daniel, Dave,
> > >
> > > Here is the first (and pretty late) drm-misc-next PR.
> > >
> > > It's pretty big due to the lateness, but there's nothing really major
> > > showing up. It's pretty much the usual bunch of reworks, fixes, and
> > > new helpers being introduced.
> > >
> >
> > dim: 415d2e9e0757 ("Revert "drm/gem: Rename drm_gem_dumb_map_offset()
> > to drm_gem_map_offset()""): mandatory review missing.
> > dim: be855382bacb ("Revert "drm/panfrost: Use drm_gem_map_offset()""):
> > mandatory review missing.
> > dim: e4eee93d2577 ("drm/vgem: drop DRM_AUTH usage from the driver"):
> > mandatory review missing.
> > dim: 88209d2c5035 ("drm/msm: drop DRM_AUTH usage from the driver"):
> > mandatory review missing.
> > dim: ccdae4257569 ("drm/nouveau: remove open-coded drm_invalid_op()"):
> > mandatory review missing.
> >
> > Pretty sure review in drm-misc-next is a rule. I don't even see acks
> > on most of these.
>
> Yes. I guess for reverts it's not cool, but also not the worst. Still
> better to get someone to ack, heck I can pull that off for emergency
> reverts with a few pings on irc, and the 2 reverts landed much later.
> But for normal patches it's definitely not ok at all. Also only
> possible if people bypass the tooling, or override the tooling with
> the -f flag to force a push.
>
> Rob, Emil, what's up here?

I committed the changes, they turned out to clearly break things and
not be fixable in any way. I said I was going to revert them[1] in
reply to the original, got no reply, and so I reverted them. Seemed
sufficient to me, but next time I'll keep the tool happy.

Rob

[1] https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2019-July/225092.html