On 2016.10.17 16:07:50 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> Yeah might be best to have a new branch with upstreaming stuff (now you
> need to at least split out bugfixes for the already merged stuff) and
> treat that like a mostly stable branch. And the still unmerged features
> (vfio and all that) would then get rebased on top of that.

yeah, plan to do so, vfio part hasn't been merged, will rebase on new branch.

> Also I already screwed up the merge, it doesn't even compile :( Sorry
> about that. Can you pls create a quick fixup patch just to make it work
> again and submit to intel-gfx? That way I can apply it directly.

Done. As currently GVT-g code is closed bound to some i915 struct and
interface, any change for i915 interface might be possible to affect
GVT-g. As general rule API changer should cover for us too, but we might
try to capture that earlier, well at least 0day guy will shout out loudly.

Open Source Technology Center, Intel ltd.

$gpg --keyserver wwwkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 4D781827

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Intel-gfx mailing list

Reply via email to