lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2020 15:20:23 +0200 From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>, Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>, Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>, Intel Graphics <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>, DRI <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>, Guru Das Srinagesh <gurus@...eaurora.org>, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>, Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drm-intel tree with Linus' tree Hi, On 9/8/20 1:04 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Hans, > > On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 10:22:06 +0200 Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> wrote: >> >> On 9/8/20 6:00 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>> >>> Today's linux-next merge of the drm-intel tree got a conflict in: >>> >>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_panel.c >>> >>> between commit: >>> >>> f8bd54d21904 ("drm/i915: panel: Use atomic PWM API for devs with an external PWM controller") > > This should have been > > 899c537c25f9 ("drm/i915: Use 64-bit division macro") Yes that makes more sense. >>> from Linus' tree and commit: >>> >>> 6b51e7d23aa8 ("drm/i915: panel: Honor the VBT PWM frequency for devs with an external PWM controller") >> >> That doesn't sound correct, those are both commits from the drm-intel tree. >> >>> from the drm-intel tree. >>> >>> I fixed it up (I just used the latter) >> >> Just taking the drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_panel.c contents of: >> >> f8bd54d21904 ("drm/i915: panel: Use atomic PWM API for devs with an external PWM controller") >> >> Is the right thing to do, the problem is a difference in a line which gets >> removed in that commit. > > Which is what I actually did, I guess :-) Yes, looks good. > Sorry about that. No problem and thank you for all the work you do on -next. Regards, Hans
Powered by blists - more mailing lists