Subject: Re: linux-next: Fixes tags need some work in the drm tree

From: Daniel Vetter <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 10:13:32 +0100

On Fri, Feb 01, 2019 at 03:34:46PM -0500, Alex Deucher wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 5:05 AM Daniel Vetter <[email-masked]> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 12:57 AM Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > In commit
> > >
> > >   a93587b31e34 ("drm/amd/display: Only get the connector state for VRR when toggled")
> > >
> > > Fixes tag
> > >
> > >   Fixes: 3cc22f281318 ("drm/amdgpu: Set FreeSync state using drm VRR properties")
> > >
> > > has these problem(s):
> > >
> > >   - Target SHA1 does not exist
> > >
> > > Maybe instead:
> > >
> > >   FIxes: bb47de736661 ("drm/amdgpu: Set FreeSync state using drm VRR properties")
> > >
> > > In commit
> > >
> > >   32e61361b82e ("drm/amd/display: Fix 64-bit division for 32-bit builds")
> > >
> > > Fixes tag
> > >
> > >   Fixes: https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2018-December/201008.html
> > >
> > > has these problem(s):
> > >
> > >   - No SHA1 recognised
> > >
> > > Maybe instead:
> > >
> > >   Fixes: 80604e27bc9 ("drm/amd/display: Use 100 Hz precision for pipe pixel clocks")
> > >
> > > In commit
> > >
> > >   c4312c27c826 ("drm/amdgpu: Cleanup 2 compiler warnings")
> > >
> > > Fixes tag
> > >
> > >   Fixes: e4ae0fc drm/amdgpu: implement gfx8 post_soft_reset
> > >
> > > has these problem(s):
> > >
> > >   - SHA1 should be at least 12 digits long
> > >     Can be fixed by setting core.abbrev to 12 (or more) or (for git v2.11
> > >     or later) just making sure it is not set (or set to "auto").
> > >
> > > Fixes tag
> > >
> > >   Fixes: 5e01c09 drm/amdgpu/gfx_v8_0: Reorder the gfx, kiq and kcq rings
> > >
> > > has these problem(s):
> > >
> > >   - Target SHA1 does not exist
> > >
> > > Maybe instead:
> > >
> > >   Fixes: c6064de4b734 ("drm/amdgpu/gfx_v8_0: Reorder the gfx, kiq and kcq rings test sequence")
> >
> > Yeah the top 71 commits in the latest amdgpu pull got rebased, which
> > is a bit much. Where are we with the "direct group commit, no more
> > rebases" project for amd? Still stuck on CI troubles?
> 
> In fairness, some of the rebasing was to squash in some bug fixes to
> help with bisecting.  As to direct commit, not enough internal
> priority at the moment and too many other projects.  I'll try to
> double check them better going forward.

Yeah I think internal prioritiy is probably not going to happen. The
benefit imo is much more for everyone else, since it requires a more
open&transparent process. E.g. for drm-intel a big reason for the public
CI results is that we can make the committer model work for external
people (which we do have). Hence my regular nags from me with my upstream
community hat on, and AMD definitely can do this (viz radeonsi).

Cheers, Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
[email-masked]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel