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=1793796365; b=dSPGiAGOBwmfqAjkoD1WHFDqLsaiNFpz1N+lNORZr4q2V7CMJQ/eQgTwUQxkHe3vftwZ uOmkQwQi9Hrbl0H82SxC4RsHP+u3JLSqsjI1vtRdn8VoI96e74o9aJyvrXDsRj4sv8ZMG 5eBWvVcei7samLP40igHzzb97EA9BQp8ZUupvtiRIPpRuNw8ZcB4kHZubMq66f2069THr J55s3g2dtHtJ8zeUlffOeqIF6m2rIu/bQnXR4Q8jU7PJmhlZtBLX9QbUYQ5dLH8lzZ6A+ D2BOi2OTUu9O4zROKZ8qyulhXkMO6toDIJkehkB1iKL+NK5Clb4xdrOd/n/XtNpsxJw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1793796365; h=Received:DKIM-Signature:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID: References:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; bh=PFEBhpVkx/Db8FKRqQ1f85p8DYST/pInzrhzPSOP1ko=; b=XoVfZW5N6DwVoRlp6DUoKogVcWMefUdAlKFGlR/vYPn2/yMgP4fn+MpX9Z7dRc/zI9v8 v8bSGlbOnrDMBQKmkDIb3HfYVRuT2ykR8/w769RA6xpN4mZOhx9XxfKiRqomABY3hc3Du eNZSP31HthockKGTI3OVhUVp9PsWQA18ChUVv0S0J9B8tO3Z3mBIlrHXMOt/eS5QB7dd9 k5wVfm5V+o9nwR8e87F/gPYxCOtnI1Tnc8tspWkjnn/rdRp8x6Y62ITXTQS8jQ126qcxs JFy96k6Un2CUgPMoFRD5d/LNNysOUEGhBmQyJy2VURaD+GM94UBkkn4plgpzuYeFTlQ== 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=iirwKghM; 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 E61A9606A326; Wed, 4 Nov 2026 12:46:04 +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=iirwKghM Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 86BEE1F000C1; Wed, 4 Nov 2026 12:46:04 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1793796364; bh=PFEBhpVkx/Db8FKRqQ1f85p8DYST/pInzrhzPSOP1ko=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=iirwKghMMMh85yOn9eMgrtze/QVFlkbamubxCg5KXK9uIiE1xxZkFy3spIr9QXM00 me/JMZv1X13+X32IwTbGLy0yRlrLX2QZ6uTUB4aIpHpiAf8e4QAjKi/7eZSHXH8AqP kjBT4yuLGNXCODj1eVe+1wAZqYYQz7qExZfH+SEyjf+8umNgHoh1s/jdGeil4W9p9T Q5AueLgnrVkMw0bqofKC/zJ9+oxC5JncAqIr3Q9Sy0lmUQy2KNSM/s1ca83C36OpZq Jxs/ryagZN9leSZ5n7M/mX0dR0jrHdHigb+cJWn7zBm91YQjiPMl+XrxV4OCVIbsTW IvgWW2yoYnUtg== Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2026 07:46:03 -0500 From: Sasha Levin To: Thorsten Leemhuis Cc: Rodrigo Vivi , Dave Airlie , Simona Vetter , Maarten Lankhorst , Maxime Ripard , Thomas Zimmermann , Jani Nikula , Joonas Lahtinen , Tvrtko Ursulin , Matthew Brost , Thomas =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hellstr=F6m?= , Danilo Krummrich , Alice Ryhl , Alex Deucher , Christian =?iso-8859-1?Q?K=F6nig?= , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Mark Brown , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Linux kernel regressions list Subject: Re: [RFC] linux-next: replace the DRM trees with a single drm-for-linux-next Message-ID: References: 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Wed, Nov 04, 2026 at 06:49:29AM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >On 11/2/26 19:41, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: >> >> We'd like to replace most of the DRM trees in linux-next with a single >> branch: >> >> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/tip.git#drm-for-linux-next >> >> It replaces these entries: >> >> drm/drm-next, drm/drm-fixes >> drm-misc/for-linux-next, drm-misc/for-linux-next-fixes >> drm-intel/for-linux-next, drm-intel/for-linux-next-fixes >> drm-xe/drm-xe-next >> drm-rust/for-linux-next, drm-rust/for-linux-next-fixes >> amdgpu (agd5f/linux.git#drm-next) >> >> drm-exynos, drm-msm, drm-msm-fixes, drm-msm-lumag, drm-nova and etnaviv >> are not part of it and stay as they are. >> >> The main reason is to reduce the conflict pain that Mark constantly faces. >> All of them should be handled already when we are rebuilding drm-tip.> [...] > >Please correct me if I'm wrong: this seems to mix up patches for the >current cycle (e.g., -fixes branches) with those for the next one -- so >I assume the former won't end up in next/pending-fixes anymore? > >Do we care? Or is this a situation along the lines of "yeah, that's a >downside of this, but given the upsides, we do this nevertheless"? > >For my work it was kind of nice to have the two tracks separated, as it >allowed me to easily check "is this fix for a recent regression in >pending-fixes, as it should, because it should be fixed this cycle". > >Side note: two years ago there was also the idea to increase testing of >pending-fixes or branches feeding into it separately, but it afaics got >no real traction: > >linus-next: improving functional testing for to-be-merged pull requests >https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZyI-Y00J3DBUkon3@sashalap/ This is actually still happening today, just evolved a bit! I have a tree similar to linux-next, but it's fully automated, using LLMs for conflict resolutions, and generated a few times a day: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sashal/linux-next.git/ Instead of just a single tree, it builds the tree with categories, grouping them into "%s-next" trees for easier testing by subsystem or theme, and later merges them all into the one big "all-next" branch. The equivalent of the auto-pending-fixes branch you mentioned would be the "fixes-next" branch, and for the drm folks it would be the "drm-next" branch. This whole thing is still being very much used today, finding real problems :) -- Thanks, Sasha