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

[Daniel Vetter]

On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 04:24:51PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> 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.

Do you still have the git tree you've pushed wrongly and could publish it
somewhere? I'm suprised that dim push didn't catch this, we've added a few
more sanity checks last time around this happened. I'd have expected dim
to complain about all the patches lacking you're signed-off-by, since a
rebase would have changed a lot of patches to be committed by you.
-Daniel
> 
> > 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
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch