linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] drm/panthor: Make the timeout per-queue instead of per-job

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: <CAPj87rP=HEfPDX8dDM_-BptLmt054x+WHZdCBZOtdMX=X4VkjA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2025 18:05:32 +0100
From: Daniel Stone <daniel@...ishbar.org>
To: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>
Cc: Ashley Smith <ashley.smith@...labora.com>, Steven Price <steven.price@....com>, 
	Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@....com>, Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>, 
	Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>, 
	David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>, Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>, 
	kernel@...labora.com, Daniel Stone <daniels@...labora.com>, 
	dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] drm/panthor: Make the timeout per-queue instead of per-job

On Mon, 26 May 2025 at 08:16, Boris Brezillon
<boris.brezillon@...labora.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 24 May 2025 16:03:37 +0100
> Daniel Stone <daniel@...ishbar.org> wrote:
> > Unfortunately I have to revoke my T-b as we're seeing a pile of
> > failures in a CI stress test with this, e.g.
> > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/daniels/mesa/-/jobs/77004047
>
> Note that you need [1] too, which I don't see in your tree. Ashley, a
> note for next time: when you have dependencies between patches, like is
> the case here, it's usually better to post them in the same patchset,
> so that:
>
> 1. They are applied in the right order
> 2. Cherry-pickers/reviewers know that they need to consider both to
> have a working branch.

Oh, sorry I hadn't spotted that. Yeah, with that applied, you can keep
my Tb, as it looks entirely solid in CI.

Cheers,
Daniel