Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix intel_dp_atomic_find_vcpi_slots function

["Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>]

On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 03:27:17PM +0300, Lisovskiy, Stanislav wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 02:57:34PM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 01:23:29PM +0300, Stanislav Lisovskiy wrote:
> > > drm_dp_atomic_find_vcpi_slots no longer exists and needs
> > > to be used as drm_dp_atomic_find_time_slots.
> > > Also rename the function itself.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>
> > > Fixes: 7ae5ab441402 ("Extract drm_dp_atomic_find_vcpi_slots cycle to separate function")
> > 
> > The problem only exists in drm-tip. You need to revert the 
> > bad merge from rerere-cache and redo it.
> > 
> > And please always test build drm-tip after solving merge conflicts!
> 
> I would really like to figure out how it did end like that.
> 
> Here is the sequence of what I've been doing:
> 
> 1) There was a series supposed to be merged which had this new
>    change already in place i.e using drm_dp_atomic_find_time_slots.
> 2) Then using dim tools I started pushing according to workflow:
>    a) dim update-branches
>    b) dim checkout drm-intel-next
>    c) wget those series mbox and run dim apply-branch drm-intel-next
>       Got conflict: it was complaining about those changes around
>       drm_dp_atomic_find_time_slots and after some checking I figured
>       out that drm_dp_atomic_find_time_slots doesn't exist anymore.
>       Here probably was my bad, as I wrongly assumed that those changes
>       were probably reverted as it was also mentioned, that there was
>       regression because of those.
>       
>       So I resolved this conflict by putting drm_dp_atomic_find_vcpi_slots
>       back instead of drm_dp_atomic_find_time_slots _and_ actually
>       built it even.
>    
>    d) I run dim push-branch drm-intel-next, it did complain about merge
>       conflict again with drm-intel-next which I fixed and results were
>       pushed.
>       I should have build at this moment as well probably. 

Yes. You didn't resolve the conflict correctly, thus the build failure.

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
Intel