On Wed, 2025-11-26 at 12:38 +0100, Thomas Hellström wrote: > On Tue, 2025-11-25 at 17:20 -0800, Matthew Brost wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 01:13:15PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote: > > > On Tue, 25 Nov 2025 00:08:37 +0100 > > > Michał Winiarski <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > We're now at v6, thanks for all the review feedback. > > > > > > > > First 24 patches are now already merged through drm-tip tree, > > > > and > > > > I hope > > > > we can get the remaining ones through the VFIO tree. > > > > > > Are all those dependencies in a topic branch somewhere? > > > Otherwise > > > to > > > go in through vfio would mean we need to rebase our next branch > > > after > > > drm is merged. LPC is happening during this merge window, so we > > > may > > > not be able to achieve that leniency in ordering. Is the better > > > approach to get acks on the variant driver and funnel the whole > > > thing > > > through the drm tree? Thanks, > > > > +1 on merging through drm if VFIO maintainers are ok with this. > > I've > > done this for various drm external changes in the past with > > maintainers > > acks. > > > > Matt > > @Michal Winiarski > > Are these patches depending on any other VFIO changes that are queued > for 6.19? > > If not and with proper VFIO acks, I could ask Dave / Sima to allow > this > for drm-xe-next-fixes pull. Then I also would need a strong > justification for it being in 6.19 rather in 7.0. > > Otherwise we'd need to have the VFIO changes it depends on in a topic > branch, or target this for 7.0 and hold off the merge until we can > backmerge 6.9-rc1.
6.19-rc1 /Thomas > > Thanks, > Thomas > > > > > > > > > > Alex >
