From patchwork Tue Oct 29 13:31:40 2024 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Fedor Pchelkin X-Patchwork-Id: 13854928 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (gabe.freedesktop.org [131.252.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB848D2AB3C for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 13:32:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A59C710E138; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 13:32:08 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: gabe.freedesktop.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ispras.ru header.i=@ispras.ru header.b="ftJCncz0"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail.ispras.ru (mail.ispras.ru [83.149.199.84]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BB3410E138; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 13:32:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fpc.intra.ispras.ru (unknown [10.10.165.10]) by mail.ispras.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EAB4E40A1DA8; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 13:32:02 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mail.ispras.ru EAB4E40A1DA8 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ispras.ru; s=default; t=1730208723; bh=h+3XDlW6T/2uheGXHlR7H84/H84D9Vs/nAUE/JVwEwM=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:From; b=ftJCncz0e5MIm4Z/yaQ3uNRRWlnNDce39E8zxZk0yPtHeputXrErzMOHxlUkCnvxx 3VtKRHJ0oVoKL8BOMF18L3lHAQvDuIqm1qptvweIwTWGBbxzGNNEGzf6aM+nlwPaa+ nWPL4vgHbwQReqP0Ksp9TjtBCAkm5lDkFP83FbX4= From: Fedor Pchelkin To: Greg Kroah-Hartman , stable@vger.kernel.org, Sasha Levin , Alex Deucher Cc: Fedor Pchelkin , Harry Wentland , Leo Li , Rodrigo Siqueira , =?utf-8?q?Christian_K=C3=B6nig?= , "Pan, Xinhui" , David Airlie , Daniel Vetter , Fangzhi Zuo , Wayne Lin , amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lvc-project@linuxtesting.org, Alexey Khoroshilov , Mario Limonciello , Jonathan Gray Subject: [PATCH 0/1] On DRM -> stable process Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2024 16:31:40 +0300 Message-Id: <20241029133141.45335-1-pchelkin@ispras.ru> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.39.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Direct Rendering Infrastructure - Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dri-devel-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "dri-devel" Hi all, I'm writing as a bystander working with 6.1.y stable branch and possibly lacking some context with the established DRM -> stable patch flow, Cc'ing a large number of people. The commit being reverted from 6.1.y is the one that duplicates the changes already backported to that branch with another commit. It is essentially a "similar" commit but cherry-picked at some point during the DRM development process. The duplicate has no runtime effect but should not actually remain in the stable trees. It was already reverted [1] from 6.6/6.10/6.11 but still made its way later to 6.1. [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/stable/20241007035711.46624-1-jsg@jsg.id.au/T/#u At [1] Greg KH also stated that the observed problems are quite common while backporting DRM patches to stable trees. The current duplicate patch has in every sense a cosmetic impact but in other circumstances and for other patches this may have gone wrong. So, is there any way to adjust this process? BTW, a question to the stable-team: what Git magic (3-way-merge?) let the duplicate patch be applied successfully? The patch context in stable trees was different to that moment so should the duplicate have been expected to fail to be applied? --- Fedor