Re: [PATCH 4.19 092/190] drm/nouveau: Dont WARN_ON VCPI allocation failures

From: Sasha Levin
Date: Fri Sep 13 2019 - 11:26:41 EST

On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 11:09:22AM -0400, Ilia Mirkin wrote:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 11:01 AM Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 03:54:56PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 10:46:27AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 09:33:36AM -0400, Ilia Mirkin wrote:
>> > Hi Greg,
>> >
>> > This feels like it's missing a From: line.
>> >
>> > commit b513a18cf1d705bd04efd91c417e79e4938be093
>> > Author: Lyude Paul <lyude@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> > Date: Mon Jan 28 16:03:50 2019 -0500
>> >
>> > drm/nouveau: Don't WARN_ON VCPI allocation failures
>> >
>> > Is this an artifact of your notification-of-patches process and I
>> > never noticed before, or was the patch ingested incorrectly?
>> It was always like this for patches that came through me. Greg's script
>> generates an explicit "From:" line in the patch, but I never saw the
>> value in that since git does the right thing by looking at the "From:"
>> line in the mail header.
>> The right thing is being done in stable-rc and for the releases. For
>> your example here, this is how it looks like in the stable-rc tree:
>> commit bdcc885be68289a37d0d063cd94390da81fd8178
>> Author: Lyude Paul <lyude@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> AuthorDate: Mon Jan 28 16:03:50 2019 -0500
>> Commit: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> CommitDate: Fri Sep 13 14:05:29 2019 +0100
>> drm/nouveau: Don't WARN_ON VCPI allocation failures
>Yeah, we should fix your scripts to put the explicit From: line in here
>as we are dealing with patches in this format and it causes confusion at
>times (like now.) It's not the first time and that's why I added those
>lines to the patches.

Heh, didn't think anyone cared about this scenario for the stable-rc

I'll go add it.

But... why do you actually care?

Just a hygiene thing. Everyone else sends patches the normal way, with
accurate attribution. Why should stable be different?

It shouldn't.

It's just a mismatch between our two somewhat seperate workflow.

Technically it's Greg who needs to be adding that line since the patches
I have in stable-queue correctly state the author, and it only goes
wrong when they're being formatted into mails sent for the -rc cycles.

But yes, thanks for pointing it out, I'll go add it in the scripts.