patches dropped from drm-misc-next [Was: Re: [PATCH 00/53] drm: Convert to platform remove callback returning] void

[Uwe Kleine-König]

On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 11:45:37AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 18, 2023 at 06:29:50PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > Hello Maxime,
> > 
> > On Sun, Jun 18, 2023 at 04:32:55PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jun 18, 2023 at 02:39:15PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 10:57:23AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > > > > On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 9:15 AM Uwe Kleine-König
> > > > > <u.kleine-koenig at pengutronix.de> wrote:
> > > > > > Together with the patches that were applied later the topmost commit
> > > > > > from this series is c2807ecb5290 ("drm/omap: Convert to platform remove
> > > > > > callback returning void"). This commit was part for the following next
> > > > > > tags:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >         $ git tag -l --contains c2807ecb5290
> > > > > >         next-20230609
> > > > > >         next-20230613
> > > > > >         next-20230614
> > > > > >         next-20230615
> > > > > >
> > > > > > However in next-20230616 they are missing. In next-20230616
> > > > > > drm-misc/for-linux-next was cf683e8870bd4be0fd6b98639286700a35088660.
> > > > > > Compared to c2807ecb5290 this adds 1149 patches but drops 37 (that are
> > > > > > also not included with a different commit id). The 37 patches dropped
> > > > > > are 13cdd12a9f934158f4ec817cf048fcb4384aa9dc..c2807ecb5290:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >         $ git shortlog -s 13cdd12a9f934158f4ec817cf048fcb4384aa9dc..c2807ecb5290
> > > > > >              1  Christophe JAILLET
> > > > > >              2  Jessica Zhang
> > > > > >              5  Karol Wachowski
> > > > > >              1  Laura Nao
> > > > > >             27  Uwe Kleine-König
> > > > > >              1  Wang Jianzheng
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I guess this was done by mistake because nobody told me about dropping
> > > > > > my/these patches? Can c2807ecb5290 please be merged into drm-misc-next
> > > > > > again?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Actually, it was probably a mistake that these patches got merged to
> > > > > linuxnext during the 4 days that you noticed. However, your patches
> > > > > aren't dropped and are still present in drm-misc-next.
> > > > > 
> > > > > drm-misc has a bit of a unique model and it's documented fairly well here:
> > > > > 
> > > > > https://drm.pages.freedesktop.org/maintainer-tools/drm-misc.html
> > > > 
> > > > Is there a flaw then in this unique model (or its implementation) when
> > > > drm-misc/for-linux-next moves in a non-fast-forward manner? This isn't
> > > > expected, is it?
> > > 
> > > There's no expectation afaik. Any tree merged in linux-next can be
> > > rebased, drop a patch, amend one, etc. without any concern.
> > 
> > I agree that there are no rules broken for a tree that is included in
> > next and a maintainer is free to rewrite their tree independant of the
> > tree being included in next.
> > 
> > Still I think that shouldn't be used as an excuse.
> 
> As an excuse for what?

Just because the rules for trees in next allow the merged branch to be
rewritten, shouldn't be used to justify rewriting the branch.

IMHO you still should ensure that only commits make it into any next
snapshot via your tree before X-rc1 for some X (e.g. v6.5) that you
intend to be included in X-rc1.

> > For me, if a maintainer puts some patch into next that's a statement
> > saying (approximately) "I think this patch is fine and I intend to
> > send it to Linus during the next merge window.".
> 
> I mean, that's what we're saying and doing?

No, on 2023-06-09 I assumed that my patches will go into v6.5-rc1 (as it
was part of next-20230609). A few days later however the patches were
dropped.

The two options that would have made the experience smoother for me are:

 a) keep c2807ecb5290 in next and send it for v6.5-rc1; or
 b) keep c2807ecb5290 in a branch that doesn't result it entering next
    before v6.5-rc1.

> > So my expectation is that if a patch is dropped again from next, there
> > was a problem and it would be fair if the maintainer tells the
> > author/submitter about this problem and that the patch was dropped.
> 
> But it wasn't dropped,

From my POV it was dropped from next as it was part of next between
next-20230609 and next-20230615 but not any more since next-20230616.
You talk about (not) being dropped from some branch in drm-misc, that's
irrelevant for the thing I'm complaining about.

> it's still very much to be sent to Linus during the next merge window.

"next merge window" as in the one leading to 6.5-rc1? Either we mean
different things when we say "next merge window", or there is a
misunderstanding I don't see yet.

Best regards
Uwe




-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linux-aspeed/attachments/20230619/7f149314/attachment-0001.sig>