linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drm-xe tree with the drm-intel tree

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <87ed5qk2cc.fsf@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2024 11:43:15 +0300
From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, Simona Vetter
 <simona.vetter@...ll.ch>, Joonas Lahtinen
 <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
 Dave Airlie <airlied@...hat.com>
Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@...el.com>, Thomas Hellström
 <thomas.hellstrom@...ux.intel.com>, Intel Graphics
 <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>, DRI <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
 DRM XE List <intel-xe@...ts.freedesktop.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List
 <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Next Mailing List
 <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drm-xe tree with the drm-intel
 tree

On Wed, 11 Sep 2024, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Fri, 6 Sep 2024 13:15:02 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>
>> Today's linux-next merge of the drm-xe tree got a conflict in:
>> 
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
>> 
>> between commit:
>> 
>>   11d0613af7c5 ("drm/i915/display: include drm/drm_probe_helper.h where needed")
>> 
>> from the drm-intel tree and commit:
>> 
>>   87d8ecf01544 ("drm/xe: replace #include <drm/xe_drm.h> with <uapi/drm/xe_drm.h>")
>> 
>> from the drm-xe tree.
>> 
>> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
>> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
>> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
>> is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
>> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
>> complex conflicts.
>> 
>> -- 
>> Cheers,
>> Stephen Rothwell
>> 
>> diff --cc drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
>> index 303d00b99a68,75736faf2a80..000000000000
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/xe_display.c
>> @@@ -10,8 -10,7 +10,8 @@@
>>   
>>   #include <drm/drm_drv.h>
>>   #include <drm/drm_managed.h>
>>  +#include <drm/drm_probe_helper.h>
>> - #include <drm/xe_drm.h>
>> + #include <uapi/drm/xe_drm.h>
>>   
>>   #include "soc/intel_dram.h"
>>   #include "i915_drv.h"		/* FIXME: HAS_DISPLAY() depends on this */
>
> This is now a conflict between the drm-intel and drm trees.

I backmerged drm-next to drm-intel-next, resolving the conflict.

Thanks,
Jani.

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel