From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bali.collaboradmins.com (bali.collaboradmins.com [148.251.105.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4AA5635E949; Thu, 9 Apr 2026 07:48:05 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.251.105.195 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775720886; cv=none; b=YVprpQWWj5F53s3g3H2d3spe2/wo9Suq0uny7sgBMuRrCEIaaVYrB3RPC+JzIJFwjZBm3pwy/3KIoWYsRW8WTiqsdkkx4KMbIkRciWTbXwC3iWqxP6BT5uh1V/AuRUgjqpQrQ66vaGR0EQkXR9ygHRRcrF6imf7sz4AqxJeBybM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775720886; c=relaxed/simple; bh=VyUNNaejMB1+HhTOT6IIe7zR55+rghGSBohfTvZcAIc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=NyoKwe870wbtpnaZ0h7cNM+Am9drRWf2PyiIONTFt0aZN70I2WTPoCtY+cxtpFL9vvq/alRU7/j6524Cicpt3g0tQSKD3WOuTYOZGQZjBbJt1kLaJFa2Km/FydphOBSTm0IPyjq9d72yaxCyzJCHmysK3VyvXF5W/ZoW5/iNVm8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=collabora.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=collabora.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=collabora.com header.i=@collabora.com header.b=NIMz+/7G; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.251.105.195 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=collabora.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=collabora.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=collabora.com header.i=@collabora.com header.b="NIMz+/7G" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=collabora.com; s=mail; t=1775720883; bh=VyUNNaejMB1+HhTOT6IIe7zR55+rghGSBohfTvZcAIc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=NIMz+/7GSy+4CxRWZaWtJ9h0ywWz5znzgApZoqTqwN3VPHHJjA8ey3Lgoq0/XiS8c QccxjkufHLdbGakORNTnyL5r9JDovPXHXXj4QyzNyZZao2/ZNtVcD0A/8GUCMCQdfZ n9iU9PE82oaQr/Aw1r+BMjaZmS9nx7a+3AKJYSunHlhWHd+lBV6sjosijgmU2XcFVJ CIT2uzgcFMGNY/L6fwNi5eUrIMLVJQhg4t9U09A9FkEzrf661XpX5tHw5qlw3TxHDC wPjtkYBGx7vm6e3rUie63TsClpynIbQSKJoB9z9+p/MnK2gZhj1FcN1GV2WcZc8qr4 tVPB5/sswWA6A== Received: from fedora (unknown [100.64.0.11]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (prime256v1) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: bbrezillon) by bali.collaboradmins.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3324417E0C83; Thu, 9 Apr 2026 09:48:03 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2026 09:47:59 +0200 From: Boris Brezillon To: Mark Brown Cc: Dave Airlie , DRI , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List , Pedro Demarchi Gomes , Thomas Zimmermann Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drm tree with the drm-misc-fixes tree Message-ID: <20260409094759.03d0698b@fedora> In-Reply-To: References: <20260320163902.24571f5d@fedora> Organization: Collabora X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.3.1 (GTK 3.24.51; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-next@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 8 Apr 2026 18:26:04 +0100 Mark Brown wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2026 at 04:39:02PM +0100, Boris Brezillon wrote: > > Mark Brown wrote: > > > > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This > > > is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial > > > conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree > > > is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating > > > with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly > > > complex conflicts. > > > I have a slightly different conflict resolution (it's the one we currently > > have in drm-tip[1]). > > > [1]https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/tip > > Sorry, this got buried and won't be relevant any more - for future > reference if you could send an incremental patch on top of the merge > that was there that is much easier for me to ingest. Okay, I'll try to remember that for next time. > Merges are > remembered with git rerere and then fixed up with patches on top of that > if needed. For the record, we do resolve conflicts between sub-drm branches too (end result is stored in the drm-tip branch on the tree I shared in my previous email, and the rerere-cache is available there as well), so it might be worth checking what we came up with next time you see a conflict between any of the drm branches.