[Mesa-stable] [pull 10.2] backport more freedreno fixes plus on xa fix

[Carl Worth]

Rob Clark <robdclark at gmail.com> writes:
> Backport last round of piglit fixes to 10.2.  These have been soaking
> on master for a couple weeks, and I've not found any regression yet.
> And they get us from 80% pass up to nearly 83% pass, so a bit more
> progress in the right direction.  (For reference, at end of Feb we
> were at 50% pass ;-))
>
> Also, one XA patch to fix a segfault (also been on master for a
> while).

Thanks, Rob!

I've now pushed my own version of all of these out to the 10.2 branch.

I didn't pull in your branch directly, since that's not the way we
generally do things with the stable branch.

Instead, what we like to do is to cherry-pick each change over from the
master branch. (That's likely what you had done in each case, but you
didn't have the "cherry picked from" text that we get with "git
cherry-pick -x").

Anyway, so what I did here was to match each commit from your branch
with the corresponding commit on master, and I ran "git cherry-pick -x"
on each of those. (In the one case where a commit didn't pick cleanly, I
used the version from your branch, but still left the "cherry picked
from" text in the commit message).

So, in the future, it will probably be easier for both of us if you can
just email a list of commit IDs of patches on master that should be
cherry-picked. (Or, of course, you can use the CC syntax in the commit
message to automatically nominate things for the stable branch).

Finally, we do like to keep the stable branches cleanly as
one-commit-per-bug-fix. We'll even go out of our way to squash together
a couple of commits from the master branch, (for example, when one
commit is a bug fix, and then subsequently there's a fix for that fix,
etc.).

The several commits you have for "update generated headers" violate that
rule, (since none of these commits are bug fixes). I was tempted to
squash these into other patches, but I wasn't sure I would get the
dependencies right, (would it be the preceding commit in every case?).

I am more willing to bend the stable branch rules for a series of
commits that only touch the code within one driver. So that's what I've
done here. But it would be even nicer not to have to do this in the
future.

What is the header-generation step about? Would there be a reasonable
way to make that a part of the build process so that these files
wouldn't be in git and we wouldn't have these commits in the future?

That's maybe something to think about at least.

So take a look at what I just pushed to the 10.2 branch and please let
me know if I botched anything.

-Carl

-- 
carl.d.worth at intel.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 818 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-stable/attachments/20140703/983e3519/attachment.sig>