[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20190424185617.16865-1-eric@anholt.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 11:56:16 -0700
From: Eric Anholt <eric@...olt.net>
To: dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Eric Anholt <eric@...olt.net>
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] drm/doc: Allow new UAPI to be used once it's in the driver's -next.
I was trying to figure out if it was permissible to merge the Mesa
side of V3D's CSD support yet while it's in drm-misc-next but not
drm-next, and developers on #dri-devel IRC had differing opinions of
what the requirement was. Propose a clarification here to see if Dave
Airlie agrees.
Signed-off-by: Eric Anholt <eric@...olt.net>
---
Personally, I thought the rule was "has to be in drm-next", but
assuming our review processes aren't totally broken, this should be
enough.
Documentation/gpu/drm-uapi.rst | 5 +++--
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/gpu/drm-uapi.rst b/Documentation/gpu/drm-uapi.rst
index c9fd23efd957..8e5545dfbf82 100644
--- a/Documentation/gpu/drm-uapi.rst
+++ b/Documentation/gpu/drm-uapi.rst
@@ -92,8 +92,9 @@ leads to a few additional requirements:
requirements by doing a quick fork.
- The kernel patch can only be merged after all the above requirements are met,
- but it **must** be merged **before** the userspace patches land. uAPI always flows
- from the kernel, doing things the other way round risks divergence of the uAPI
+ but it **must** be merged to the driver's -next tree (as documented in
+ MAINTAINERS) **before** the userspace patches land. uAPI always flows from
+ the kernel, doing things the other way round risks divergence of the uAPI
definitions and header files.
These are fairly steep requirements, but have grown out from years of shared
--
2.20.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists