Re: [PULL for v6.6] drm-misc-next

[Rob Clark]

On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 12:23 PM Dave Airlie <airlied@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > Otherwise, there should be something like a drm-ci tree, from which you
> > > can fetch the changes directly.
> >
> > I asked for a pull request so that I could also merge it to msm-next
> > so that I can do CI this cycle.  (Unlike the earlier out-of-tree
> > version of the drm/ci yml, this version needs to be in the branch that
> > CI runs on, so I can't use the workaround that I had in previous
> > cycles.)
> >
> > Perhaps it should be a pull request targeting drm-next instead of drm-misc-next.
> >
> > We were going to do this one-off for this cycle and then evaluate
> > going forward whether a drm-ci-next tree is needed.  But perhaps it is
> > a good idea.
>
>
> I'm still not 100% sure how this is going down, and I'm meant to be off today,
>
> Don't send this as patches to drm-misc-next, but I think we'd want
> this in drm-next for a cycle before sending it to Linus, but maybe
> it's not directly interfering with the kernel so it's fine
>
> Ideally when the real merge window opens and drm-next is merged I'd
> want to have a branch + PR written for this against drm-next that I
> can send to Linus separately and see how it goes.

The tricky thing is we need this patch in-tree to run CI in the first
place.. so soak time in drm-next on it's own isn't hugely useful.  (Or
at least I'd need to move msm-next forward to drm-next for it to be
useful.)

I guess that is a bit of an advantage to the earlier approach that
kept everything but the expectation files in a different git tree..

BR,
-R