Re: AMD drm patch workflow is broken for stable trees

[Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Fri, Aug 23, 2024 at 05:23:46PM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 1:11 AM Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 05:30:08PM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 4:55 PM Felix Kuehling <felix.kuehling@amd.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 2024-08-12 11:00, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > As some of you have noticed, there's a TON of failure messages being
> > > > > sent out for AMD gpu driver commits that are tagged for stable
> > > > > backports.  In short, you all are doing something really wrong with how
> > > > > you are tagging these.
> > > > Hi Greg,
> > > >
> > > > I got notifications about one KFD patch failing to apply on six branches
> > > > (6.10, 6.6, 6.1, 5.15, 5.10 and 5.4). The funny thing is, that you
> > > > already applied this patch on two branches back in May. The emails had a
> > > > suspicious looking date in the header (Sep 17, 2001). I wonder if there
> > > > was some date glitch that caused a whole bunch of patches to be re-sent
> > > > to stable somehow:
> > >
> > > I think the crux of the problem is that sometimes patches go into
> > > -next with stable tags and they end getting taken into -fixes as well
> > > so after the merge window they end up getting picked up for stable
> > > again.  Going forward, if they land in -next, I'll cherry-pick -x the
> > > changes into -fixes so there is better traceability.
> >
> > Please do so, and also work to not have duplicate commits like this in
> > different branches.  Git can handle merges quite well, please use it.
> >
> > If this shows up again in the next -rc1 merge window without any
> > changes, I'll have to just blackhole all amd drm patches going forward
> > until you all tell me you have fixed your development process.
> 
> Just a heads up, you will see some of these when the 6.12 merge window
> due to what is currently in -next and the fixes that went into 6.11,
> but going forward we have updated our process and it should be better.

Can you give me a list of the git ids that I should be ignoring for
6.12-rc1?  Otherwise again, it's a huge waste of time on my side trying
to sift through them and figure out if the rejection is real or not...

thanks,

greg k-h