[Intel-gfx] [GIT PULL] drm-misc + drm-intel: Add support for out-of-band hotplug notification

[Hans de Goede]

Hi,

On 8/26/21 1:43 PM, Vivi, Rodrigo wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-08-26 at 10:23 +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 04:03:43PM +0000, Vivi, Rodrigo wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2021-08-24 at 18:48 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On 8/24/21 10:45 AM, Jani Nikula wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 20 Aug 2021, Hans de Goede <hdegoede at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Hello drm-misc and drm-intel maintainers,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My "Add support for out-of-band hotplug notification"
>>>>>> patchset:
>>>>>> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/93763/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is ready for merging now, as discussed on IRC I based this
>>>>>> series
>>>>>> on top drm-tip and when trying to apply the i915 parts on top
>>>>>> of drm-misc this fails due to conflict.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So as Jani suggested here is a pull-req for a topic-branch
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> entire set, minus the troublesome i915 bits. Once this has
>>>>>> been
>>>>>> merged
>>>>>> into both drm-misc-next and drm-intel-next I can push the 2
>>>>>> i915
>>>>>> patch do drm-intel-next on top of the merge.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Note there are also 2 drivers/usb/typec patches in here these
>>>>>> have Greg KH's Reviewed-by for merging through the drm tree,
>>>>>> Since this USB code does not change all that much. I also
>>>>>> checked
>>>>>> and the drm-misc-next-2021-08-12 base of this tree contains
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> same last commit to the modified file as usb-next.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Daniel Vetter mentioned on IRC that it might be better for
>>>>>> you to
>>>>>> simply
>>>>>> pick-up the series directly from patchwork, that is fine too
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> case don't forget to add:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Lyude Paul <lyude at redhat.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To the entire series (given in a reply to the cover-letter)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh at linuxfoundation.org>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To the usb/typec patches (patch 7/8), this was given in reply
>>>>>> to a previous posting of the series and I forgot to add this
>>>>>> in the resend.
>>>>>
>>>>> Since this is mostly touching drm core, I think it should be
>>>>> merged
>>>>> to
>>>>> drm-misc-next first, and drm-intel-next after. Please let us
>>>>> know.
>>>>
>>>> I agree this should go to drm-misc-next first.
>>>>
>>>> (I was planning on pushing this to drm-misc-next myself,
>>>> but then ended up going with the topic branch because of the
>>>> conflict in the i915 bits.)
>>>
>>> Just to be clear and avoid confusion: This pull request does apply
>>> cleanly on drm-misc-next nd drm-intel-next right now.
>>>
>>> I'm just waiting for drm-misc-next maintainers to pull this to drm-
>>> misc-next so I can pull it to drm-intel-next.
>>>
>>> Maxime, is that your round now?
>>> or Thomas?
>>
>> That's me, I just pushed it to drm-misc-next
> 
> Thank you!
> I also pushed to drm-intel-next.

Thanks, I pushed the remaining 2 i915 patches depending on this
to drm-intel-next last week (but I forgot to reply to this email then).

Regards,

Hans