From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
To: Alex Hung <alex.hung@amd.com>, Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@gmail.com>
Cc: Leo Li <sunpeng.li@amd.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
Rodrigo Siqueira <Rodrigo.Siqueira@amd.com>,
amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, "Wang,
Yu \(Charlie\)" <Yu.Wang4@amd.com>,
Daniel Wheeler <daniel.wheeler@amd.com>,
Hersen Wu <hersenxs.wu@amd.com>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
Wenchieh Chien <wenchieh.chien@amd.com>,
Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>,
Dave Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/4] drm/amd/display: stop using drm_edid_override_connector_update()
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2023 15:27:27 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87msy6hyds.fsf@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b32199ef-7179-3908-3bed-dd164cadc5de@amd.com>
On Thu, 31 Aug 2023, Alex Hung <alex.hung@amd.com> wrote:
> On 2023-08-30 01:29, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> On Tue, 29 Aug 2023, Alex Hung <alex.hung@amd.com> wrote:
>>> There is a patch under internal reviews. It removes calls edid_override
>>> and drm_edid_override_connector_update as intended in this patchset but
>>> does not remove the functionality.
>>
>> While I am happy to hear there's progress, I'm somewhat baffled the
>> review is internal. The commits that I suggested to revert were also
>> only reviewed internally, as far as I can see... And that's kind of the
>> problem.
>>
>> Upstream code should be reviewed in public.
>
> Hi Jani,
>
> All patches are sent for public reviews, the progress is summarized as
> the followings:
>
> == internal ==
>
> 1. a patch or patches are tested by CI.
> 2. internal technical and IP reviews are performed to ensure no concerns
> before patches are merged to internal branch.
>
> == public ==
>
> 3. a regression test and IP reviews are performed by engineers before
> sending to public mailing lists.
> 4. the patchset is sent for public reviews ex.
> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/122498/
> 5. patches are merged to public repo.
The point about public review is that there's no transparency to the
steps before 4. The patches are posted for public review with
Reviewed-by and Acked-by already added, based on internal review, and
there is de facto no public review taking place on the code drops. There
is zero visibility to the discussions taking place. We don't know if
it's just rubber stamping, we don't know what concerns were raised, if
any.
I'm mainly disappointed about the double standards here, given that we
post most patches directly upstream (especially ones that have zero
reason to be embargoed like the ones being discussed here), and the ones
that have gone through internal review will be stripped of all prior
internal Reviewed-by's and Acked-by's before posting. Because that's the
upstream expectation.
BR,
Jani.
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-01 12:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-22 12:01 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/4] drm/amd/display: stop using drm_edid_override_connector_update() Jani Nikula
2023-08-22 12:01 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/4] Revert "drm/amd/display: drop unused count variable in create_eml_sink()" Jani Nikula
2023-08-22 12:01 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/4] Revert "drm/amd/display: assign edid_blob_ptr with edid from debugfs" Jani Nikula
2023-08-22 12:01 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/4] Revert "drm/amd/display: mark amdgpu_dm_connector_funcs_force static" Jani Nikula
2023-08-22 12:01 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 4/4] Revert "drm/amd/display: implement force function in amdgpu_dm_connector_funcs" Jani Nikula
2023-08-22 12:06 ` Jani Nikula
2023-08-22 13:22 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for drm/amd/display: stop using drm_edid_override_connector_update() Patchwork
2023-08-22 13:22 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2023-08-22 13:35 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2023-08-22 19:38 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/4] " Alex Hung
2023-08-23 8:03 ` Jani Nikula
2023-08-29 10:48 ` Jani Nikula
2023-08-29 15:29 ` Wu, Hersen
2023-08-29 15:44 ` Alex Deucher
2023-08-29 16:01 ` Wu, Hersen
2023-08-29 16:20 ` Jani Nikula
2023-08-29 17:03 ` Jani Nikula
2023-08-29 18:53 ` Alex Hung
2023-08-30 7:29 ` Jani Nikula
2023-08-30 9:42 ` Daniel Vetter
2023-08-31 22:01 ` Alex Hung
2023-09-01 12:27 ` Jani Nikula [this message]
2023-09-01 19:00 ` Alex Deucher
2023-09-04 7:57 ` Daniel Vetter
2023-08-23 1:14 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for drm/amd/display: stop using drm_edid_override_connector_update() (rev2) Patchwork
2023-08-23 1:14 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2023-08-23 1:32 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2023-08-23 10:43 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: " Patchwork
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87msy6hyds.fsf@intel.com \
--to=jani.nikula@intel.com \
--cc=Rodrigo.Siqueira@amd.com \
--cc=Yu.Wang4@amd.com \
--cc=airlied@redhat.com \
--cc=alex.hung@amd.com \
--cc=alexander.deucher@amd.com \
--cc=alexdeucher@gmail.com \
--cc=amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=daniel.wheeler@amd.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=hersenxs.wu@amd.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=sunpeng.li@amd.com \
--cc=wenchieh.chien@amd.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox