From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1793912890; b=aoMqaLGNjxv99sDUnFM5bUXwvMQTSFIgx8440p8p7fN9dfOZYad1VYAiiUINP8nScM9l k6EAveAU28/3nhItwedVh95hzQ49aqpQQw/34BzD5VvMcHzgywaKKmxTkkC0sGqT6bIf9 DRJQpIBR5+cRI7MqC92Urp9ij8EkduFpSAF+ym8FYPiHvgHBwbSuRfEEyqbehiyW5jbi0 OtZBUkETWoJbKiC1OXbatYO96n1YilEkRGjfLn/z1kyYcWPyYgr8fZlpwWb+5wHrvq8to xDuKe7KaDO1GbIDAchzYlxVNUCh9vFM4Wt2MdqpD/6Nqw1ViV3FqmRtKDZ6CdCNcCDw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1793912890; h=Received:DKIM-Signature:Content-Type:Date:Message-Id:Subject:Cc:To: From:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Mime-Version:References:In-Reply-To; bh=zpjjG0/XZ4vbFxePWjR4ITlPAwQKEqDgfiUoqqdwJJw=; b=3ysR2xxfFAFgUApBdU0z6K6hEkLBuVAI2IXkHDgpWlF9fG9DyOwJP5ihzPIGOM3lT+ie aeSamoSJe/RQpMKdVX9YTiIo8JISbnNVRzOco3wYRsm16ywNwyjeHmMLTnya4heP2kduh 7CpfdE2j3j34bW4rbkrR9333fNUgJsbzG5LgwaNLna0G9QMUs0fEW+89/KIbpPR7qun+T CEal34NtljDN61DyHLahAI+N5TjLaw9xUts0EYFUbgzg/x55iGrFnglnX0OSK5AEz3/Ev DXQYfsJpxtFZfrlSrrWsuDUMPBPyqt6qtEAqIBkpRXXQhDb2TOMvcE0mR1WHVjEWZ3Q== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=DVXdgfUs; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (quasi.space.kernel.org [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 612E6606D828 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2026 21:08:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=DVXdgfUs Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 98B441F00904; Thu, 5 Nov 2026 21:08:06 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1793912889; bh=zpjjG0/XZ4vbFxePWjR4ITlPAwQKEqDgfiUoqqdwJJw=; h=Date:Subject:Cc:To:From:References:In-Reply-To; b=DVXdgfUs3Y23/LQV8g9mAsVOOF4/enYk5TjZXQZICil6RJSm8qPw1/7y3f0WuoZho mqi38x/iMGVBbuHEKQ7moVrRG8M2al1ziDpjw4FDHjOiqrW8k21BM/9lMdCmSggbM/ lSozANod2txSaDrhMmtvQU3ykrJhoZaSnR6ru+Ecdid53qV6vsJk06F6cWi70OscYN QJwAEeJIhsn9nU/iiYUwwwkiLzrQmPf38k7RYh5RiNvK0hBVMUZer+DRngh5a1LT6h M9lPCIXccF+a3HYO1q/FchdhwMHsDxFB0yz2atvz2oYH0/pStOwadFn1QHA9qAA10N UmRjOrlRk4U8Q== Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2026 22:08:05 +0100 Message-Id: Subject: Re: [RFC] linux-next: replace the DRM trees with a single drm-for-linux-next Cc: "Dave Airlie" , "Rodrigo Vivi" , "Alex Deucher" , "Simona Vetter" , "Maarten Lankhorst" , "Maxime Ripard" , "Thomas Zimmermann" , "Joonas Lahtinen" , "Tvrtko Ursulin" , "Matthew Brost" , =?utf-8?q?Thomas_Hellstr=C3=B6m?= , "Alice Ryhl" , "Alex Deucher" , =?utf-8?q?Christian_K=C3=B6nig?= , , "Mark Brown" , To: "Jani Nikula" From: "Danilo Krummrich" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailing-List: linux-next@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list Mime-Version: 1.0 References: <629d19bcd0f61974f3e1c94c90b4052216d2a967@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <629d19bcd0f61974f3e1c94c90b4052216d2a967@intel.com> On Thu Nov 5, 2026 at 2:44 PM CET, Jani Nikula wrote: > The main downside is the delay between merging in a driver tree and > hitting linux-next. But we could also decide to mandate more regular > pull request to drm-next, maybe weekly, especially for the drivers with > more traffic. This will mean lots more pull requests, but it's really > not a bad thing to keep them smaller. I was already concerned about losing up to a week's linux-next exposure wit= h the proposed global cutoff at -rc5 [1]. This approach would extend that delay throughout the cycle. Even with weekly PRs, changes could wait up to a week before reaching linux-next. They would also only get that exposure after being merged into drm-next, whereas I'd like them to receive linux-next testing before that m= erge. I don't think that such a compromise is acceptable: If a tree breaks linux-= next it would mean that linux-next is broken until the next PR hits drm-next (an= d not only until it is fixed in the tree causing the issue). I don't want to sound like a broken record (sorry if I already do :), but I still think the git merge-base --is-ancestor $remote/$linux_next_fixes $remote/$linux_fixe= s switch we already have in dim seems like the best fit. It already does exac= tly what we (and linux-next) need and is accurate: it preserves direct linux-ne= xt coverage and bases the selection on the actual tree state. And with the pro= posed git request-pull --final option it is very maintainer friendly. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/DMMS9R5JJ4ME.TBIB1TNLB3IP@kernel.org/