Re: [PATCH 4.19 092/190] drm/nouveau: Dont WARN_ON VCPI allocation failures

Sasha Levin
2019-09-13T15:26:40Z

On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 11:09:22AM -0400, Ilia Mirkin wrote:
>On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 11:01 AM Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 03:54:56PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> >On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 10:46:27AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 09:33:36AM -0400, Ilia Mirkin wrote:
>> >> > Hi Greg,
>> >> >
>> >> > This feels like it's missing a From: line.
>> >> >
>> >> > commit b513a18cf1d705bd04efd91c417e79e4938be093
>> >> > Author: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
>> >> > Date: Mon Jan 28 16:03:50 2019 -0500
>> >> >
>> >> > drm/nouveau: Don't WARN_ON VCPI allocation failures
>> >> >
>> >> > Is this an artifact of your notification-of-patches process and I
>> >> > never noticed before, or was the patch ingested incorrectly?
>> >>
>> >> It was always like this for patches that came through me. Greg's script
>> >> generates an explicit "From:" line in the patch, but I never saw the
>> >> value in that since git does the right thing by looking at the "From:"
>> >> line in the mail header.
>> >>
>> >> The right thing is being done in stable-rc and for the releases. For
>> >> your example here, this is how it looks like in the stable-rc tree:
>> >>
>> >> commit bdcc885be68289a37d0d063cd94390da81fd8178
>> >> Author: Lyude Paul <lyude@redhat.com>
>> >> AuthorDate: Mon Jan 28 16:03:50 2019 -0500
>> >> Commit: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
>> >> CommitDate: Fri Sep 13 14:05:29 2019 +0100
>> >>
>> >> drm/nouveau: Don't WARN_ON VCPI allocation failures
>> >
>> >Yeah, we should fix your scripts to put the explicit From: line in here
>> >as we are dealing with patches in this format and it causes confusion at
>> >times (like now.) It's not the first time and that's why I added those
>> >lines to the patches.
>>
>> Heh, didn't think anyone cared about this scenario for the stable-rc
>> patches.
>>
>> I'll go add it.
>>
>> But... why do you actually care?
>
>Just a hygiene thing. Everyone else sends patches the normal way, with
>accurate attribution. Why should stable be different?

It shouldn't.

It's just a mismatch between our two somewhat seperate workflow.

Technically it's Greg who needs to be adding that line since the patches
I have in stable-queue correctly state the author, and it only goes
wrong when they're being formatted into mails sent for the -rc cycles.

But yes, thanks for pointing it out, I'll go add it in the scripts.

--
Thanks,
Sasha