Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drm-intel tree with the mm tree

From: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2025 12:16:50 +1100

Hi All,

On Mon, 6 Jan 2025 13:03:48 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]> 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