[RESEND,00/53] Rid GPU from W=1 warnings

  This is a resend.  All of these patches have been sent before.

The vmwgfx ones were even applied, but were dropped for some reason.

Lee Jones (53):
  drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init: Demote obvious abuse of kernel-doc
  drm/nouveau/dispnv50/disp: Remove unused variable 'ret'
  drm/msm/dp/dp_display: Remove unused variable 'hpd'
  drm/amd/display/dc/bios/command_table: Remove unused variable
  include: drm: drm_atomic: Make use of 'new_plane_state'
  drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/volt/gk20a: Demote non-conformant kernel-doc
    headers
  drm/amd/display/dc/bios/command_table: Remove unused variable and
    associated comment
  drm/amd/display/dc/calcs/dce_calcs: Move some large variables from the
    stack to the heap
  drm/amd/display/dc/calcs/dce_calcs: Remove some large variables from
    the stack
  drm/amd/display/dc/dce/dce_aux: Remove duplicate line causing 'field
    overwritten' issue
  drm/amd/display/dc/dce80/dce80_resource: Make local functions static
  drm/nouveau/nvkm/engine/gr/gf100: Demote non-conformant kernel-doc
    header
  drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo: Remove unused variables 'dev'
  drm/nouveau/nouveau_display: Remove set but unused variable 'width'
  drm/nouveau/dispnv04/crtc: Demote non-conforming kernel-doc headers
  drm/nouveau/dispnv50/disp: Remove unused variable 'ret' from function
    returning void
  drm/nouveau/dispnv50/headc57d: Make local function 'headc57d_olut'
    static
  drm/nouveau/nv50_display: Remove superfluous prototype for local
    static functions
  drm/nouveau/dispnv50/disp: Include header containing our prototypes
  drm/nouveau/nouveau_ioc32: File headers are not good candidates for
    kernel-doc
  drm/nouveau/nouveau_svm: Remove unused variable 'ret' from void
    function
  drm/nouveau/nouveau_ioc32: Demote kernel-doc abuse to standard comment
    block
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_execbuf: Fix some kernel-doc related issues
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms: Remove unused variable 'ret' from
    'vmw_du_primary_plane_atomic_check()'
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms: Mark vmw_{cursor,primary}_plane_formats as
    __maybe_unused
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_drv: Fix some kernel-doc misdemeanours
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_ioctl: Provide missing '@' sign required by
    kernel-doc
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_resource: Fix worthy function headers demote some
    others
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_ttm_buffer: Supply some missing parameter
    descriptions
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_fifo: Demote non-conformant kernel-doc header
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_ldu: Supply descriptions for 'state' function
    parameter
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms: Update worthy function headers and demote
    others
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_overlay: Demote kernel-doc abuses to standard
    comment blocks
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_fence: Add, remove and demote various documentation
    params/headers
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_bo: Remove superfluous param description and supply
    another
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_context: Demote kernel-doc abuses
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_scrn: Demote unworthy kernel-doc headers and update
    others
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_surface: Fix some kernel-doc related issues
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cmdbuf_res: Rename param description and remove
    another
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_shader: Demote kernel-doc abuses and fix-up worthy
    headers
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cmdbuf: Fix a bunch of missing or incorrectly
    formatted/named params
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cmdbuf_res: Remove unused variable 'ret'
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_stdu: Add some missing param/member descriptions
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cmdbuf: Fix misnaming of 'headers' should be plural
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cotable: Fix a couple of simple documentation
    problems
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_so: Add description for 'vmw_view's 'rcu' member
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_binding: Provide some missing param descriptions and
    remove others
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_msg: Fix misspelling of 'msg'
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_blit: Add description for 'vmw_bo_cpu_blit's 'diff'
    param
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_validation: Add some missing struct member/function
    param descriptions
  drm/vmwgfx/ttm_object: Demote half-assed headers and fix-up another
  drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_thp: Add description for 'vmw_thp_manager's member
    'manager'
  drm/vmwgfx/ttm_object: Reorder header to immediately precede its
    struct

 .../drm/amd/display/dc/bios/command_table.c   |   16 +-
 .../gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/calcs/dce_calcs.c  | 1151 +++++++++--------
 drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/dce/dce_aux.h  |    1 -
 .../drm/amd/display/dc/dce80/dce80_resource.c |   16 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_display.c           |    3 -
 drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv04/crtc.c       |    4 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv50/disp.c       |   10 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv50/headc57d.c   |    2 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.c          |    4 -
 drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_display.c     |    8 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_ioc32.c       |    4 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_svm.c         |    5 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv50_display.h        |    3 -
 .../gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/engine/gr/gf100.c    |    2 +-
 .../gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c   |  204 +--
 .../gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/volt/gk20a.c  |    4 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/ttm_object.c           |   25 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_binding.c       |    9 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_blit.c          |    1 +
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_bo.c            |    2 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cmd.c           |    2 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cmdbuf.c        |   14 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cmdbuf_res.c    |    8 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_context.c       |    6 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cotable.c       |    3 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_drv.c           |    8 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_execbuf.c       |   20 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_fence.c         |   18 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_ioctl.c         |    2 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c           |   16 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.h           |    4 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_ldu.c           |    4 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_msg.c           |    2 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_overlay.c       |   16 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_resource.c      |   10 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_scrn.c          |   10 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_shader.c        |   10 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_so.c            |    1 +
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_stdu.c          |    9 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_surface.c       |   17 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_thp.c           |    1 +
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_ttm_buffer.c    |    2 +
 drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_validation.c    |    5 +-
 include/drm/drm_atomic.h                      |    3 +-
 44 files changed, 818 insertions(+), 847 deletions(-)

Cc: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>
Cc: amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Anthony Koo <Anthony.Koo@amd.com>
Cc: Ben Skeggs <bskeggs@redhat.com>
Cc: "Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>
Cc: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>
Cc: David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>
Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: freedreno@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Harry Wentland <harry.wentland@amd.com>
Cc: Jeremy Kolb <jkolb@brandeis.edu>
Cc: Kuogee Hsieh <khsieh@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
Cc: Leo Li <sunpeng.li@amd.com>
Cc: linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org
Cc: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-media@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>
Cc: nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Qinglang Miao <miaoqinglang@huawei.com>
Cc: Rob Clark <rob.clark@linaro.org>
Cc: Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com>
Cc: Roland Scheidegger <sroland@vmware.com>
Cc: Sean Paul <sean@poorly.run>
Cc: Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@linaro.org>
Cc: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>
Cc: VMware Graphics <linux-graphics-maintainer@vmware.com>
Cc: Zack Rusin <zackr@vmware.com>
  

The vmwgfx ones look all good to me, so for
23-53: Reviewed-by: Roland Scheidegger <sroland@vmware.com>
That said, they were already signed off by Zack, so not sure what
happened here.

Roland

On 03.03.21 14:42, Lee Jones wrote:
> This is a resend.  All of these patches have been sent before.
> 
> The vmwgfx ones were even applied, but were dropped for some reason.
> 
> Lee Jones (53):
>   drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init: Demote obvious abuse of kernel-doc
>   drm/nouveau/dispnv50/disp: Remove unused variable 'ret'
>   drm/msm/dp/dp_display: Remove unused variable 'hpd'
>   drm/amd/display/dc/bios/command_table: Remove unused variable
>   include: drm: drm_atomic: Make use of 'new_plane_state'
>   drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/volt/gk20a: Demote non-conformant kernel-doc
>     headers
>   drm/amd/display/dc/bios/command_table: Remove unused variable and
>     associated comment
>   drm/amd/display/dc/calcs/dce_calcs: Move some large variables from the
>     stack to the heap
>   drm/amd/display/dc/calcs/dce_calcs: Remove some large variables from
>     the stack
>   drm/amd/display/dc/dce/dce_aux: Remove duplicate line causing 'field
>     overwritten' issue
>   drm/amd/display/dc/dce80/dce80_resource: Make local functions static
>   drm/nouveau/nvkm/engine/gr/gf100: Demote non-conformant kernel-doc
>     header
>   drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo: Remove unused variables 'dev'
>   drm/nouveau/nouveau_display: Remove set but unused variable 'width'
>   drm/nouveau/dispnv04/crtc: Demote non-conforming kernel-doc headers
>   drm/nouveau/dispnv50/disp: Remove unused variable 'ret' from function
>     returning void
>   drm/nouveau/dispnv50/headc57d: Make local function 'headc57d_olut'
>     static
>   drm/nouveau/nv50_display: Remove superfluous prototype for local
>     static functions
>   drm/nouveau/dispnv50/disp: Include header containing our prototypes
>   drm/nouveau/nouveau_ioc32: File headers are not good candidates for
>     kernel-doc
>   drm/nouveau/nouveau_svm: Remove unused variable 'ret' from void
>     function
>   drm/nouveau/nouveau_ioc32: Demote kernel-doc abuse to standard comment
>     block
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_execbuf: Fix some kernel-doc related issues
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms: Remove unused variable 'ret' from
>     'vmw_du_primary_plane_atomic_check()'
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms: Mark vmw_{cursor,primary}_plane_formats as
>     __maybe_unused
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_drv: Fix some kernel-doc misdemeanours
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_ioctl: Provide missing '@' sign required by
>     kernel-doc
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_resource: Fix worthy function headers demote some
>     others
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_ttm_buffer: Supply some missing parameter
>     descriptions
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_fifo: Demote non-conformant kernel-doc header
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_ldu: Supply descriptions for 'state' function
>     parameter
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms: Update worthy function headers and demote
>     others
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_overlay: Demote kernel-doc abuses to standard
>     comment blocks
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_fence: Add, remove and demote various documentation
>     params/headers
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_bo: Remove superfluous param description and supply
>     another
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_context: Demote kernel-doc abuses
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_scrn: Demote unworthy kernel-doc headers and update
>     others
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_surface: Fix some kernel-doc related issues
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cmdbuf_res: Rename param description and remove
>     another
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_shader: Demote kernel-doc abuses and fix-up worthy
>     headers
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cmdbuf: Fix a bunch of missing or incorrectly
>     formatted/named params
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cmdbuf_res: Remove unused variable 'ret'
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_stdu: Add some missing param/member descriptions
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cmdbuf: Fix misnaming of 'headers' should be plural
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cotable: Fix a couple of simple documentation
>     problems
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_so: Add description for 'vmw_view's 'rcu' member
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_binding: Provide some missing param descriptions and
>     remove others
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_msg: Fix misspelling of 'msg'
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_blit: Add description for 'vmw_bo_cpu_blit's 'diff'
>     param
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_validation: Add some missing struct member/function
>     param descriptions
>   drm/vmwgfx/ttm_object: Demote half-assed headers and fix-up another
>   drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_thp: Add description for 'vmw_thp_manager's member
>     'manager'
>   drm/vmwgfx/ttm_object: Reorder header to immediately precede its
>     struct
> 
>  .../drm/amd/display/dc/bios/command_table.c   |   16 +-
>  .../gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/calcs/dce_calcs.c  | 1151 +++++++++--------
>  drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/dce/dce_aux.h  |    1 -
>  .../drm/amd/display/dc/dce80/dce80_resource.c |   16 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_display.c           |    3 -
>  drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv04/crtc.c       |    4 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv50/disp.c       |   10 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv50/headc57d.c   |    2 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_bo.c          |    4 -
>  drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_display.c     |    8 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_ioc32.c       |    4 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_svm.c         |    5 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nv50_display.h        |    3 -
>  .../gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/engine/gr/gf100.c    |    2 +-
>  .../gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c   |  204 +--
>  .../gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/volt/gk20a.c  |    4 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/ttm_object.c           |   25 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_binding.c       |    9 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_blit.c          |    1 +
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_bo.c            |    2 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cmd.c           |    2 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cmdbuf.c        |   14 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cmdbuf_res.c    |    8 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_context.c       |    6 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_cotable.c       |    3 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_drv.c           |    8 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_execbuf.c       |   20 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_fence.c         |   18 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_ioctl.c         |    2 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.c           |   16 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_kms.h           |    4 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_ldu.c           |    4 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_msg.c           |    2 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_overlay.c       |   16 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_resource.c      |   10 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_scrn.c          |   10 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_shader.c        |   10 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_so.c            |    1 +
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_stdu.c          |    9 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_surface.c       |   17 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_thp.c           |    1 +
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_ttm_buffer.c    |    2 +
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_validation.c    |    5 +-
>  include/drm/drm_atomic.h                      |    3 +-
>  44 files changed, 818 insertions(+), 847 deletions(-)
> 
> Cc: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>
> Cc: amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> Cc: Anthony Koo <Anthony.Koo@amd.com>
> Cc: Ben Skeggs <bskeggs@redhat.com>
> Cc: "Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>
> Cc: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
> Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>
> Cc: David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>
> Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
> Cc: freedreno@lists.freedesktop.org
> Cc: Harry Wentland <harry.wentland@amd.com>
> Cc: Jeremy Kolb <jkolb@brandeis.edu>
> Cc: Kuogee Hsieh <khsieh@codeaurora.org>
> Cc: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
> Cc: Leo Li <sunpeng.li@amd.com>
> Cc: linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org
> Cc: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-media@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
> Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>
> Cc: nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org
> Cc: Qinglang Miao <miaoqinglang@huawei.com>
> Cc: Rob Clark <rob.clark@linaro.org>
> Cc: Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com>
> Cc: Roland Scheidegger <sroland@vmware.com>
> Cc: Sean Paul <sean@poorly.run>
> Cc: Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@linaro.org>
> Cc: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>
> Cc: VMware Graphics <linux-graphics-maintainer@vmware.com>
> Cc: Zack Rusin <zackr@vmware.com>
>
  

On Fri, 05 Mar 2021, Roland Scheidegger wrote:

> The vmwgfx ones look all good to me, so for
> 23-53: Reviewed-by: Roland Scheidegger <sroland@vmware.com>
> That said, they were already signed off by Zack, so not sure what
> happened here.

Yes, they were accepted at one point, then dropped without a reason.

Since I rebased onto the latest -next, I had to pluck them back out of
a previous one.
  

On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 09:19:32AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Fri, 05 Mar 2021, Roland Scheidegger wrote:
> 
> > The vmwgfx ones look all good to me, so for
> > 23-53: Reviewed-by: Roland Scheidegger <sroland@vmware.com>
> > That said, they were already signed off by Zack, so not sure what
> > happened here.
> 
> Yes, they were accepted at one point, then dropped without a reason.
> 
> Since I rebased onto the latest -next, I had to pluck them back out of
> a previous one.

They should show up in linux-next again. We merge patches for next merge
window even during the current merge window, but need to make sure they
don't pollute linux-next. Occasionally the cut off is wrong so patches
show up, and then get pulled again.

Unfortunately especially the 5.12 merge cycle was very wobbly due to some
confusion here. But your patches should all be in linux-next again (they
are queued up for 5.13 in drm-misc-next, I checked that).

Sorry for the confusion here.
-Daniel
  

On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Daniel Vetter wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 09:19:32AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Fri, 05 Mar 2021, Roland Scheidegger wrote:
> > 
> > > The vmwgfx ones look all good to me, so for
> > > 23-53: Reviewed-by: Roland Scheidegger <sroland@vmware.com>
> > > That said, they were already signed off by Zack, so not sure what
> > > happened here.
> > 
> > Yes, they were accepted at one point, then dropped without a reason.
> > 
> > Since I rebased onto the latest -next, I had to pluck them back out of
> > a previous one.
> 
> They should show up in linux-next again. We merge patches for next merge
> window even during the current merge window, but need to make sure they
> don't pollute linux-next. Occasionally the cut off is wrong so patches
> show up, and then get pulled again.
> 
> Unfortunately especially the 5.12 merge cycle was very wobbly due to some
> confusion here. But your patches should all be in linux-next again (they
> are queued up for 5.13 in drm-misc-next, I checked that).
> 
> Sorry for the confusion here.

Oh, I see.  Well so long as they don't get dropped, I'll be happy.

Thanks for the explanation Daniel
  

On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Lee Jones wrote:

> On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 09:19:32AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > On Fri, 05 Mar 2021, Roland Scheidegger wrote:
> > > 
> > > > The vmwgfx ones look all good to me, so for
> > > > 23-53: Reviewed-by: Roland Scheidegger <sroland@vmware.com>
> > > > That said, they were already signed off by Zack, so not sure what
> > > > happened here.
> > > 
> > > Yes, they were accepted at one point, then dropped without a reason.
> > > 
> > > Since I rebased onto the latest -next, I had to pluck them back out of
> > > a previous one.
> > 
> > They should show up in linux-next again. We merge patches for next merge
> > window even during the current merge window, but need to make sure they
> > don't pollute linux-next. Occasionally the cut off is wrong so patches
> > show up, and then get pulled again.
> > 
> > Unfortunately especially the 5.12 merge cycle was very wobbly due to some
> > confusion here. But your patches should all be in linux-next again (they
> > are queued up for 5.13 in drm-misc-next, I checked that).
> > 
> > Sorry for the confusion here.
> 
> Oh, I see.  Well so long as they don't get dropped, I'll be happy.
> 
> Thanks for the explanation Daniel

After rebasing today, all of my GPU patches have remained.  Would
someone be kind enough to check that everything is still in order
please?
  

On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 9:17 AM Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Lee Jones wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 09:19:32AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 05 Mar 2021, Roland Scheidegger wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > The vmwgfx ones look all good to me, so for
> > > > > 23-53: Reviewed-by: Roland Scheidegger <sroland@vmware.com>
> > > > > That said, they were already signed off by Zack, so not sure what
> > > > > happened here.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, they were accepted at one point, then dropped without a reason.
> > > >
> > > > Since I rebased onto the latest -next, I had to pluck them back out of
> > > > a previous one.
> > >
> > > They should show up in linux-next again. We merge patches for next merge
> > > window even during the current merge window, but need to make sure they
> > > don't pollute linux-next. Occasionally the cut off is wrong so patches
> > > show up, and then get pulled again.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately especially the 5.12 merge cycle was very wobbly due to some
> > > confusion here. But your patches should all be in linux-next again (they
> > > are queued up for 5.13 in drm-misc-next, I checked that).
> > >
> > > Sorry for the confusion here.
> >
> > Oh, I see.  Well so long as they don't get dropped, I'll be happy.
> >
> > Thanks for the explanation Daniel
>
> After rebasing today, all of my GPU patches have remained.  Would
> someone be kind enough to check that everything is still in order
> please?

It's still broken somehow. I've kiced Maxime and Maarten again,
they're also on this thread.
-Daniel
  

On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 9:32 PM Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 9:17 AM Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Lee Jones wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 09:19:32AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, 05 Mar 2021, Roland Scheidegger wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > The vmwgfx ones look all good to me, so for
> > > > > > 23-53: Reviewed-by: Roland Scheidegger <sroland@vmware.com>
> > > > > > That said, they were already signed off by Zack, so not sure what
> > > > > > happened here.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, they were accepted at one point, then dropped without a reason.
> > > > >
> > > > > Since I rebased onto the latest -next, I had to pluck them back out of
> > > > > a previous one.
> > > >
> > > > They should show up in linux-next again. We merge patches for next merge
> > > > window even during the current merge window, but need to make sure they
> > > > don't pollute linux-next. Occasionally the cut off is wrong so patches
> > > > show up, and then get pulled again.
> > > >
> > > > Unfortunately especially the 5.12 merge cycle was very wobbly due to some
> > > > confusion here. But your patches should all be in linux-next again (they
> > > > are queued up for 5.13 in drm-misc-next, I checked that).
> > > >
> > > > Sorry for the confusion here.
> > >
> > > Oh, I see.  Well so long as they don't get dropped, I'll be happy.
> > >
> > > Thanks for the explanation Daniel
> >
> > After rebasing today, all of my GPU patches have remained.  Would
> > someone be kind enough to check that everything is still in order
> > please?
>
> It's still broken somehow. I've kiced Maxime and Maarten again,
> they're also on this thread.

You're patches have made it into drm-next meanwhile, so they should
show up in linux-next through that tree at least. Except if that one
also has some trouble.
-Daniel
  

On Thu, 18 Mar 2021, Daniel Vetter wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 9:32 PM Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 9:17 AM Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Lee Jones wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 09:19:32AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > > > On Fri, 05 Mar 2021, Roland Scheidegger wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > The vmwgfx ones look all good to me, so for
> > > > > > > 23-53: Reviewed-by: Roland Scheidegger <sroland@vmware.com>
> > > > > > > That said, they were already signed off by Zack, so not sure what
> > > > > > > happened here.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yes, they were accepted at one point, then dropped without a reason.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Since I rebased onto the latest -next, I had to pluck them back out of
> > > > > > a previous one.
> > > > >
> > > > > They should show up in linux-next again. We merge patches for next merge
> > > > > window even during the current merge window, but need to make sure they
> > > > > don't pollute linux-next. Occasionally the cut off is wrong so patches
> > > > > show up, and then get pulled again.
> > > > >
> > > > > Unfortunately especially the 5.12 merge cycle was very wobbly due to some
> > > > > confusion here. But your patches should all be in linux-next again (they
> > > > > are queued up for 5.13 in drm-misc-next, I checked that).
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry for the confusion here.
> > > >
> > > > Oh, I see.  Well so long as they don't get dropped, I'll be happy.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the explanation Daniel
> > >
> > > After rebasing today, all of my GPU patches have remained.  Would
> > > someone be kind enough to check that everything is still in order
> > > please?
> >
> > It's still broken somehow. I've kiced Maxime and Maarten again,
> > they're also on this thread.
> 
> You're patches have made it into drm-next meanwhile, so they should
> show up in linux-next through that tree at least. Except if that one
> also has some trouble.

Thanks for letting me know.

I see some patches made it back in, others didn't.

I'll resend the stragglers - bear with.
  

On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 08:24:07AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Mar 2021, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 9:32 PM Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 9:17 AM Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 09:19:32AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > > > > On Fri, 05 Mar 2021, Roland Scheidegger wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The vmwgfx ones look all good to me, so for
> > > > > > > > 23-53: Reviewed-by: Roland Scheidegger <sroland@vmware.com>
> > > > > > > > That said, they were already signed off by Zack, so not sure what
> > > > > > > > happened here.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Yes, they were accepted at one point, then dropped without a reason.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Since I rebased onto the latest -next, I had to pluck them back out of
> > > > > > > a previous one.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > They should show up in linux-next again. We merge patches for next merge
> > > > > > window even during the current merge window, but need to make sure they
> > > > > > don't pollute linux-next. Occasionally the cut off is wrong so patches
> > > > > > show up, and then get pulled again.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Unfortunately especially the 5.12 merge cycle was very wobbly due to some
> > > > > > confusion here. But your patches should all be in linux-next again (they
> > > > > > are queued up for 5.13 in drm-misc-next, I checked that).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sorry for the confusion here.
> > > > >
> > > > > Oh, I see.  Well so long as they don't get dropped, I'll be happy.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for the explanation Daniel
> > > >
> > > > After rebasing today, all of my GPU patches have remained.  Would
> > > > someone be kind enough to check that everything is still in order
> > > > please?
> > >
> > > It's still broken somehow. I've kiced Maxime and Maarten again,
> > > they're also on this thread.
> > 
> > You're patches have made it into drm-next meanwhile, so they should
> > show up in linux-next through that tree at least. Except if that one
> > also has some trouble.
> 
> Thanks for letting me know.
> 
> I see some patches made it back in, others didn't.
> 
> I'll resend the stragglers - bear with.

The vmwgfx ones should all be back, the others I guess just werent ever
applied. I'll vacuum them all up if you resend. Apologies for the wobbly
ride.
-Daniel
  

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021, Daniel Vetter wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 08:24:07AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Thu, 18 Mar 2021, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > 
> > > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 9:32 PM Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 9:17 AM Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 09:19:32AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Fri, 05 Mar 2021, Roland Scheidegger wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The vmwgfx ones look all good to me, so for
> > > > > > > > > 23-53: Reviewed-by: Roland Scheidegger <sroland@vmware.com>
> > > > > > > > > That said, they were already signed off by Zack, so not sure what
> > > > > > > > > happened here.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Yes, they were accepted at one point, then dropped without a reason.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Since I rebased onto the latest -next, I had to pluck them back out of
> > > > > > > > a previous one.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > They should show up in linux-next again. We merge patches for next merge
> > > > > > > window even during the current merge window, but need to make sure they
> > > > > > > don't pollute linux-next. Occasionally the cut off is wrong so patches
> > > > > > > show up, and then get pulled again.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Unfortunately especially the 5.12 merge cycle was very wobbly due to some
> > > > > > > confusion here. But your patches should all be in linux-next again (they
> > > > > > > are queued up for 5.13 in drm-misc-next, I checked that).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sorry for the confusion here.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Oh, I see.  Well so long as they don't get dropped, I'll be happy.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for the explanation Daniel
> > > > >
> > > > > After rebasing today, all of my GPU patches have remained.  Would
> > > > > someone be kind enough to check that everything is still in order
> > > > > please?
> > > >
> > > > It's still broken somehow. I've kiced Maxime and Maarten again,
> > > > they're also on this thread.
> > > 
> > > You're patches have made it into drm-next meanwhile, so they should
> > > show up in linux-next through that tree at least. Except if that one
> > > also has some trouble.
> > 
> > Thanks for letting me know.
> > 
> > I see some patches made it back in, others didn't.
> > 
> > I'll resend the stragglers - bear with.
> 
> The vmwgfx ones should all be back, the others I guess just werent ever
> applied. I'll vacuum them all up if you resend. Apologies for the wobbly
> ride.

NP, it happens.