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

[Maxime Ripard]

On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 06:11:32PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 06:01:46PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 10:33:53AM +1000, Dave Airlie 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.
> >
> > Ugh, sorry for that. I guess I'm still pretty new to the
> > maintainer-side of dim, which commands did you use to check that?
>
> dim apply-pull does this. If all committers use the tooling as they should
> they shouldn't be able to push patches which violate anything here, that's
> why dim request-pull doesn't reject.

Yeah, sure, I meant to ask if there was anyway to check this before
sending the PR on our end.

> We're now working on patqches to make sure you really have to use
> dim for managing drm-misc and applying patches.

Great, thanks

Maxime

--
Maxime Ripard, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com