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

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi all,

On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 11:52:06 +1100 Stephen Rothwell  
wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the drm tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   cd61a76c210a ("drm/msm: dynamically allocate the drm-msm_gem shrinker")
> 
> from the mm-stable tree and commit:
> 
>   506efcba3129 ("drm/msm: carve out KMS code from msm_drv.c")
> 
> from the drm 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/msm/msm_drv.c
> index 7f20249d6071,443bbc3ed750..
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
> @@@ -457,23 -265,12 +265,14 @@@ static int msm_drm_init(struct device *
>   if (ret)
>   goto err_deinit_vram;
>   
> - /* the fw fb could be anywhere in memory */
> - ret = drm_aperture_remove_framebuffers(drv);
> - if (ret)
> - goto err_msm_uninit;
> - 
>  -msm_gem_shrinker_init(ddev);
>  +ret = msm_gem_shrinker_init(ddev);
>  +if (ret)
>  +goto err_msm_uninit;
>   
>   if (priv->kms_init) {
> - ret = priv->kms_init(ddev);
> - if (ret) {
> - DRM_DEV_ERROR(dev, "failed to load kms\n");
> - priv->kms = NULL;
> + ret = msm_drm_kms_init(dev, drv);
> + if (ret)
>   goto err_msm_uninit;
> - }
> - kms = priv->kms;
>   } else {
>   /* valid only for the dummy headless case, where of_node=NULL */
>   WARN_ON(dev->of_node);

This is now a conflict between the mm-stable tree and Linus' tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell


pgpEBtMD9cnFB.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

linux-next: manual merge of the drm tree with the mm-stable tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the drm tree got a conflict in:

  drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c

between commit:

  cd61a76c210a ("drm/msm: dynamically allocate the drm-msm_gem shrinker")

from the mm-stable tree and commit:

  506efcba3129 ("drm/msm: carve out KMS code from msm_drv.c")

from the drm 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/msm/msm_drv.c
index 7f20249d6071,443bbc3ed750..
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
@@@ -457,23 -265,12 +265,14 @@@ static int msm_drm_init(struct device *
if (ret)
goto err_deinit_vram;
  
-   /* the fw fb could be anywhere in memory */
-   ret = drm_aperture_remove_framebuffers(drv);
-   if (ret)
-   goto err_msm_uninit;
- 
 -  msm_gem_shrinker_init(ddev);
 +  ret = msm_gem_shrinker_init(ddev);
 +  if (ret)
 +  goto err_msm_uninit;
  
if (priv->kms_init) {
-   ret = priv->kms_init(ddev);
-   if (ret) {
-   DRM_DEV_ERROR(dev, "failed to load kms\n");
-   priv->kms = NULL;
+   ret = msm_drm_kms_init(dev, drv);
+   if (ret)
goto err_msm_uninit;
-   }
-   kms = priv->kms;
} else {
/* valid only for the dummy headless case, where of_node=NULL */
WARN_ON(dev->of_node);


pgpuFSqjfc4My.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

linux-next: manual merge of the drm tree with the mm-stable tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the drm tree got a conflict in:

  drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_pool.c

between commit:

  23baf831a32c ("mm, treewide: redefine MAX_ORDER sanely")

from the mm-stable tree and commit:

  322458c2bb1a ("drm/ttm: Reduce the number of used allocation orders for TTM 
pages")

from the drm tree.

I fixed it up (I just used the latter version - though I may have missed
something) 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


pgpWa5TUt2S4e.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature