Re: [PATCH] drm/imx: move 'legacyfb_depth' definition out of #ifdef

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 4:43 PM Noralf TrÃnnes <noralf@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Den 04.10.2018 09.48, skrev Daniel Vetter:
> > On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 9:51 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 6:13 PM Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Oct 03, 2018 at 05:49:32PM +0200, Noralf TrÃnnes wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Den 02.10.2018 22.58, skrev Arnd Bergmann:
> >>>>> The variable is now referenced unconditionally, but still
> >>>>> declared in an #ifdef:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/imx/imx-drm-core.c: In function 'imx_drm_bind':
> >>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/imx/imx-drm-core.c:264:6: error: 'legacyfb_depth' undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean 'lockdep_depth'?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Remove the #ifdef so it can always be accessed.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Fixes: f53705fd9803 ("drm/imx: Use drm_fbdev_generic_setup()")
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>> I've already applied the previous one you sent:
> >>>> https://cgit.freedesktop.org/drm/drm-misc/commit/?id=064b06bbf117f8b5e64a5143e970d5a1cf602fd6
> >>>>
> >>>> Not sure when it reaches linux-next now that we are past rc6.
> >>> Only once we're past -rc1.
> >> Can we revert f53705fd9803 in linux-next then to prevent the regression from
> >> making it into 4.20?
> > Probably simpler to cherry pick the fix from drm-misc-next to
> > drm-misc-next-fixes. Noralf, can you pls do that?
>
> Would this be the correct procudure:
>
>      dim update-branches
>      dim create-workdir drm-misc-next-fixes
>      <build>
>      CONFIG_DRM_FBDEV_EMULATION=n
>      <build will break>
>      git cherry-pick 064b06bbf117f8b5e64a5143e970d5a1cf602fd6
>      <build passes>
>      dim push-branch drm-misc-next-fixes
>
> I read that cherry picking creates a new commit with a new hash.
> But since you ask me to do this, I assume git will handle this when
> branches are merged?

The git history will show both commit IDs, which is a bit ugly but
ok if it's rare enough. There is a chance for creating a conflict if the
backport changes context, or one branch contains extra changes
that touch the same lines, but usually this is not a problem.

      Arnd