[Mesa-stable] [Mesa-dev] New stable-branch 11.0 candidate pushed

[Ilia Mirkin]

On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 12:56 PM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7 December 2015 at 17:46, Ilia Mirkin <imirkin at alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 7 December 2015 at 15:09, Ilia Mirkin <imirkin at alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 9:58 AM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hello list,
>>>>>
>>>>> The candidate for the Mesa 11.0.7 is now available. Currently we have:
>>>>>  - 43 queued
>>>>>  - 24 nominated (outstanding)
>>>>>  - and 1 rejected/obsolete patches
>>>>>
>>>>> Nominated (24)
>>>>> ==============
>>>>>
>>>>> Ilia Mirkin (6):
>>>>>       freedreno/a4xx: support lod_bias
>>>>>       freedreno/a4xx: fix 5_5_5_1 texture sampler format
>>>>>       freedreno/a4xx: point regid to "red" even for alpha-only rb formats
>>>>>       nvc0/ir: fold postfactor into immediate
>>>>>       nv50/ir: deal with loops with no breaks
>>>>>       nv50/ir: fix DCE to not generate 96-bit loads
>>>>
>>>> Any particular reason to hold these up? They're all fixing real
>>>> issues, and most were pushed quite a while ago.
>>>>
>>> The nouveau ones haven't landed in master (as of a few days ago) while
>>> the freedreno ones are missing the 11.0 note. Was meaning to confirm
>>> on the latter ones (if we do want them for 11.0), as at least one of
>>> them did not pick cleanly.
>>
>> The freedreno ones all went in before the 11.1 branchpoint, thus no
>> reason for the extra version tag.
> Ouch I see what's happening here. I'll tweak things on my end to check
> for "date merged in master" as opposed to "sent to the ML"

Well presumably my changes hit the ML before I pushed them to
master... I hope. Or perhaps I never even sent them to ML... I
probably got an IRC ack from Rob and pushed.

For deciding the versions to cherry-pick something, you definitely
need to look at its location in the tree (don't look at any dates,
that's all BS anyways, look at commit child/parent relationships...
git tag --contains is your friend =] )

>
>> The nouveau ones landed nearly a
>> week ago (Dec 2 from the looks of it).
>>
>
> nv50/ir: fix DCE to not generate 96-bit loads
> CommitDate: Thu Dec 3 23:02:57 2015 -0500
>
> vs
>
> Top of 11.0
> CommitDate: Thu Dec 3 18:54:25 2015 +0000
>
> I.e. missed by a few hours. And yes I was meaning to send this (and
> 11.1) earlier, although relocating ate a bit more time than expected
> :-\

No worries, exceptional circumstances will happen.

Cheers,

  -ilia