[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250108121650.09a8e828@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2025 12:16:50 +1100
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Dave Airlie
<airlied@...hat.com>
Cc: Simona Vetter <simona.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>, Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...el.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Next
Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>, Yafang Shao
<laoar.shao@...il.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drm-intel tree with the mm tree
Hi All,
On Mon, 6 Jan 2025 13:03:48 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the drm-intel tree got a conflict in:
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_driver.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 4fc0cee83590 ("drivers: remove get_task_comm() and print task comm directly")
>
> from the mm-nonmm-unstable branch of the mm tree and commit:
>
> f5d38d4fa884 ("drm/i915/display: convert intel_display_driver.[ch] to struct intel_display")
>
> from the drm-intel 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/i915/display/intel_display_driver.c
> index 62596424a9aa,497b4a1f045f..000000000000
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_driver.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_driver.c
> @@@ -389,8 -397,9 +397,8 @@@ void intel_display_driver_resume_access
> * Returns %true if the current thread has display HW access, %false
> * otherwise.
> */
> - bool intel_display_driver_check_access(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
> + bool intel_display_driver_check_access(struct intel_display *display)
> {
> - char comm[TASK_COMM_LEN];
> char current_task[TASK_COMM_LEN + 16];
> char allowed_task[TASK_COMM_LEN + 16] = "none";
>
> @@@ -399,14 -408,15 +407,14 @@@
> return true;
>
> snprintf(current_task, sizeof(current_task), "%s[%d]",
> - get_task_comm(comm, current),
> - task_pid_vnr(current));
> + current->comm, task_pid_vnr(current));
>
> - if (i915->display.access.allowed_task)
> + if (display->access.allowed_task)
> snprintf(allowed_task, sizeof(allowed_task), "%s[%d]",
> - i915->display.access.allowed_task->comm,
> - task_pid_vnr(i915->display.access.allowed_task));
> - get_task_comm(comm, display->access.allowed_task),
> ++ display->access.allowed_task->comm,
> + task_pid_vnr(display->access.allowed_task));
>
> - drm_dbg_kms(&i915->drm,
> + drm_dbg_kms(display->drm,
> "Reject display access from task %s (allowed to %s)\n",
> current_task, allowed_task);
>
This is now a conflict between the drm tree and the mm-nonmm-unstable
branch of the mm tree.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists