From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: "Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>,
"DRM XE List" <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>
Cc: Gustavo Sousa <gustavo.sousa@intel.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>,
Violet Monti <violet.monti@intel.com>
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the drm-xe tree with the drm-fixes tree
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2026 16:41:55 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <akfYQ5jdASorRNo7@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3259 bytes --]
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the drm-xe tree got a conflict in:
drivers/gpu/drm/xe/tests/xe_rtp_test.c
between commit:
e23fafb8594ea ("drm/xe/rtp: Add struct types for RTP tables")
from the drm-fixes tree and commits:
5ff004fdc7377 ("drm/xe/rtp: Add struct types for RTP tables")
c47ffed42b016 ("drm/xe/rtp: Add kunit tests to exercise FIELD_SET_FUNC action")
from the drm-xe tree.
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.
diff --combined drivers/gpu/drm/xe/tests/xe_rtp_test.c
index 3d0688d058d97,367811621880f..0000000000000
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/tests/xe_rtp_test.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/tests/xe_rtp_test.c
@@@ -280,6 -280,11 +280,11 @@@ static void xe_rtp_rules_tests(struct k
KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, err, param->expected_err);
}
+ static u32 bits_2_3_set(struct xe_gt *gt, struct xe_hw_engine *hwe)
+ {
+ return REG_BIT(2) | REG_BIT(3);
+ }
+
static const struct rtp_to_sr_test_case rtp_to_sr_cases[] = {
{
.name = "coalesce-same-reg",
@@@ -300,6 -305,29 +305,29 @@@
},
),
},
+ {
+ .name = "coalesce-same-reg-literal-and-func",
+ .expected_reg = REGULAR_REG1,
+ .expected_set_bits = REG_BIT(0) | REG_BIT(1) | REG_BIT(2) | REG_BIT(3),
+ .expected_clr_bits = REG_BIT(0) | REG_BIT(1) | REG_BIT(2) | REG_BIT(3),
+ .expected_active = BIT(0) | BIT(1),
+ .expected_count_sr_entries = 1,
+ /* Different bits on the same register: create a single entry */
+ .table = XE_RTP_TABLE_SR(
+ { XE_RTP_NAME("basic-1"),
+ XE_RTP_RULES(FUNC(match_yes)),
+ XE_RTP_ACTIONS(FIELD_SET(REGULAR_REG1,
+ REG_BIT(0) | REG_BIT(1),
+ REG_BIT(0) | REG_BIT(1)))
+ },
+ { XE_RTP_NAME("basic-2"),
+ XE_RTP_RULES(FUNC(match_yes)),
+ XE_RTP_ACTIONS(FIELD_SET_FUNC(REGULAR_REG1,
+ REG_BIT(2) | REG_BIT(3),
+ bits_2_3_set))
+ },
+ ),
+ },
{
.name = "no-match-no-add",
.expected_reg = REGULAR_REG1,
@@@ -417,6 -445,30 +445,30 @@@
},
),
},
+ {
+ .name = "conflict-not-disjoint-literal-and-func",
+ .expected_reg = REGULAR_REG1,
+ .expected_set_bits = REG_BIT(1) | REG_BIT(2),
+ .expected_clr_bits = REG_BIT(1) | REG_BIT(2),
+ .expected_active = BIT(0) | BIT(1),
+ .expected_count_sr_entries = 1,
+ .expected_sr_errors = 1,
+ .table = XE_RTP_TABLE_SR(
+ { XE_RTP_NAME("basic-1"),
+ XE_RTP_RULES(FUNC(match_yes)),
+ XE_RTP_ACTIONS(FIELD_SET(REGULAR_REG1,
+ REG_BIT(1) | REG_BIT(2),
+ REG_BIT(1) | REG_BIT(2)))
+ },
+ /* drop: bits are not disjoint with previous entries */
+ { XE_RTP_NAME("basic-2"),
+ XE_RTP_RULES(FUNC(match_yes)),
+ XE_RTP_ACTIONS(FIELD_SET_FUNC(REGULAR_REG1,
+ REG_BIT(2) | REG_BIT(3),
+ bits_2_3_set))
+ },
+ ),
+ },
{
.name = "conflict-reg-type",
.expected_reg = REGULAR_REG1,
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next reply other threads:[~2026-07-03 15:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-03 15:41 Mark Brown [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2026-07-03 16:20 linux-next: manual merge of the drm-xe tree with the drm-fixes tree Mark Brown
2026-07-03 15:44 Mark Brown
2026-07-03 15:44 Mark Brown
2026-07-03 15:41 Mark Brown
2026-01-30 16:05 Mark Brown
2026-01-23 15:34 Mark Brown
2025-09-19 12:49 Mark Brown
2025-09-19 12:45 Mark Brown
2025-09-22 18:28 ` Nathan Chancellor
2025-09-22 19:25 ` Lucas De Marchi
2024-12-06 12:55 Mark Brown
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=akfYQ5jdASorRNo7@sirena.org.uk \
--to=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=gustavo.sousa@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthew.d.roper@intel.com \
--cc=thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com \
--cc=violet.monti@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox