[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/vbt: Fix VBT parsing for the PSR section

[Sasha Levin]

On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 05:14:38PM +0000, Vivi, Rodrigo wrote:
>> On Jul 30, 2019, at 2:48 PM, Sasha Levin <sashal at kernel.org> wrote:
>> rather
>> than a few weeks later when Greg sends his "FAILED:" mails and gets
>> ignored because said folks have moved on.
>
>however this could potentially cause extra work and confusion like we can see on this
>thread where the developer immediately responded to your email and sent the
>backported patch to the stable mailing list.
>
>Maybe it is just because we are used to Greg's failed to apply email or maybe
>it was just a matter of education...

I think that there were a few things here that ended up causing
confusion, but I'm not quite sure how to address them.

I think that stable should have a clearer rules as to how backports
should be sent. Right now we weed through mails to stable@ to figure out
what are backport requests, what are upstream patches, and what are just
confused folks.

We have gotten pretty good at this, but still not perfect...

>But I wonder if there isn't something that could be improved on the automated
>message here. Some message clearly stating:
>
>- No action required at this point

One *could* send a backport at this point. My understanding is that when
Greg sees a failure to apply a commit tagged for stable he'll grep
through his mailbox, hopefully finding the backport as a result of this
bot bugging people.

>- you can work to prepare the backport in advance
>-  don't send it to stable before requested by Greg

Why not? I think it's fine to put it on the mailing list, specially
under the same thread, and let us deal with it after the patch goes
upstream.

--
Thanks,
Sasha