Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1758407AbcJYHJ2 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Tue, 25 Oct 2016 03:09:28 -0400
Received: from pegasos-out.vodafone.de ([80.84.1.38]:35357 "EHLO
        pegasos-out.vodafone.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1758275AbcJYHJP (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 25 Oct 2016 03:09:15 -0400
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.044
Authentication-Results: rohrpostix2.prod.vfnet.de (amavisd-new); dkim=pass
        header.i=@vodafone.de
X-DKIM: OpenDKIM Filter v2.6.8 pegasos-out.vodafone.de 5B9C44C4B81
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/powerplay: mark symbols static where possible
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        "Deucher, Alexander" <Alexander.Deucher@amd.com>,
        "Zhou, Jammy" <Jammy.Zhou@amd.com>,
        Maling list - DRI developers 
        <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        "Huang, Ray" <Ray.Huang@amd.com>,
        "Huang, JinHuiEric" <JinHuiEric.Huang@amd.com>,
        "Cui, Flora" <Flora.Cui@amd.com>, "StDenis, Tom" <Tom.StDenis@amd.com>,
        Baoyou Xie <baoyou.xie@linaro.org>,
        "tang.qiang007@zte.com.cn" <tang.qiang007@zte.com.cn>,
        "Prosyak, Vitaly" <Vitaly.Prosyak@amd.com>,
        "Min, Frank" <Frank.Min@amd.com>,
        Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>,
        "xie.baoyou@zte.com.cn" <xie.baoyou@zte.com.cn>,
        "han.fei@zte.com.cn" <han.fei@zte.com.cn>,
        "Liu, Monk" <Monk.Liu@amd.com>,
        =?UTF-8?Q?Nils_Wallm=c3=a9nius?= <nils.wallmenius@gmail.com>,
        "Yang, Eric" <Eric.Yang2@amd.com>, "Zhu, Rex" <Rex.Zhu@amd.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Yang, Young" <Young.Yang@amd.com>, "Wang, Ken" <Ken.Wang@amd.com>,
        "Edward O'Callaghan" <funfunctor@folklore1984.net>
References: <1477126582-2906-1-git-send-email-baoyou.xie@linaro.org>
 <3749845.re3cZTKYeA@wuerfel>
 <MWHPR12MB1694ABD9A93A102EB461C376F7A90@MWHPR12MB1694.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
 <42945045.1PbGIglsmX@wuerfel>
 <20161025064144.sl7rmeixwswd2uze@phenom.ffwll.local>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Christian_K=c3=b6nig?= <deathsimple@vodafone.de>
Message-ID: <d8f49ae2-cbe2-2c78-b804-e831a9d0651e@vodafone.de>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 09:09:01 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20161025064144.sl7rmeixwswd2uze@phenom.ffwll.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2553
Lines: 43

Am 25.10.2016 um 08:41 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 10:41:16PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> On Monday, October 24, 2016 8:07:16 PM CEST Deucher, Alexander wrote:
>>>>>> In fact, these functions are only used in the file in which they are
>>>>>> declared and don't need a declaration, but can be made static.
>>>>>> So this patch marks these functions with 'static'.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Baoyou Xie <baoyou.xie@linaro.org>
>>>>> This was already applied the last time you sent it out.  Sorry if I
>>>>> didn't mention that previously.
>>>> For some reason the patch hasn't made it into linux-next, so I can see
>>>> why Baoyou was getting confused here. Can you clarify what the timeline
>>>> is for the AMD DRM driver patches from between they get applied to the
>>>> AMD tree to when they make it into linux-next?
>>>>
>>> It came in late enough last cycle that it didn't make it into 4.9 (this is just a clean up not a critical bug fix), so I queued it for 4.10.  I try to reply when I apply a patch, but sometimes I miss one here and there.  Once Dave starts the drm-next tree for 4.10, it will be included in my pull request.  Pending -next patches are in my drm-next-<kernel version>-wip tree until I send Dave a formal request.
>>>
>>>> I've occasionally had a hard time with DRM (and a few other subsystems)
>>>> with bugfix patches trying to find out whether they got lost or
>>>> whether they just haven't made it into -next but are in some other tree.
>>>>
>>> For bug fixes we usually send Dave ~weekly pull requests for each -rc as necessary.  For -next stuff, each driver usually sends at least one, sometimes several pull requests for the next merge window.
>> Ok, got it. Thanks for the detailed reply!
>>
>> Do you think it would be appropriate to include your drm-next-wip tree in
>> linux-next? I think this is how a lot of the multi-level maintainer
>> setups work as it give faster feedback about when things break.
> tbh I think all drm drivers should be in linux-next. The early head-ups
> about conflicts are really useful. Same for nouveau, but given that
> nouveau is developed in a userspace git repo that's harder to pull off.

Mhm, in general I agree that seeing merge conflicts and getting a bit 
more testing earlier would be a good idea.

But Alex has the practice of regenerating his -wip branches multiple 
times. That is usually not a problem because the only one occasionally 
basing work on that branch is me, but it would be if you start to merge 
it somewhere.

Christian.

> -Daniel