Message ID | CAPM=9tyFp5LZ6QO1TaDK5jSb5+2SCe3Rjmk0_juVfr-zfspBLg@mail.gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | New, archived |
Headers | show |
Series | [git,pull] drm for 5.2-rc1 | expand |
The pull request you sent on Thu, 9 May 2019 13:28:07 +1000:
> git://anongit.freedesktop.org/drm/drm tags/drm-next-2019-05-09
has been merged into torvalds/linux.git:
https://git.kernel.org/torvalds/c/a2d635decbfa9c1e4ae15cb05b68b2559f7f827c
Thank you!
Dave, On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 8:28 PM Dave Airlie <airlied@gmail.com> wrote: > > This is the main drm pull request for 5.2. Thanks. I've merged it, but I got a couple of conflicts with fixes (reverts) to mainline in the meantime. The one to the i915 driver you seem to have applied again (after the function was moved and renamed). The one to the virtgpu driver, I really don't know if is needed any more. I suspect I completely unnecessarily merged that virtgpu_gem_prime_import_sg_table() function that came in because I decided to do the merge of the revert. It's a trivial function that just returns an error, and your tree just leaves it as NULL, and I suspect my merge doesn't hurt, but it also probably doesn't matter. So you should check my merge. Thanks, Linus
Hi, > The one to the virtgpu driver, I really don't know if is needed any > more. I suspect I completely unnecessarily merged that > virtgpu_gem_prime_import_sg_table() function that came in because I > decided to do the merge of the revert. > > It's a trivial function that just returns an error, and your tree just > leaves it as NULL, and I suspect my merge doesn't hurt, but it also > probably doesn't matter. Checked that one, the merge is correct. cheers, Gerd
On Thu, 9 May 2019 at 14:45, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > > Dave, > > On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 8:28 PM Dave Airlie <airlied@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > This is the main drm pull request for 5.2. > > Thanks. I've merged it, but I got a couple of conflicts with fixes > (reverts) to mainline in the meantime. > > The one to the i915 driver you seem to have applied again (after the > function was moved and renamed). > > The one to the virtgpu driver, I really don't know if is needed any > more. I suspect I completely unnecessarily merged that > virtgpu_gem_prime_import_sg_table() function that came in because I > decided to do the merge of the revert. > > It's a trivial function that just returns an error, and your tree just > leaves it as NULL, and I suspect my merge doesn't hurt, but it also > probably doesn't matter. > > So you should check my merge. Thanks, That explains the "I know I had something else to say" feeling. I did a test merge yesterday and then forgot to write the details down. I had a look and it seems fine, and it's Gerd's code so if he's happy with the result. Dave.