On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 06:01:47PM +0200, Anatolij Gustschin wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jul 2023 18:03:48 +0200 Ondřej Jirman megi@xff.cz wrote:
On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 05:47:47PM +0200, Anatolij Gustschin wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jul 2023 16:51:36 +0200 Ondřej Jirman megi@xff.cz wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 11:47:00PM +0200, megi xff wrote:
From: Ondrej Jirman megi@xff.cz
These are just random fixes for bugs I found while eyeballing the code and porting it to work with RK3399.
It would be nice if somebody merged this. I'd like to add display support for a few boards, and these patches are just fairly obvious bugfixes in new code added in 2023.07 that I hoped would get merged in the bugfix part of the merge window.
I hoped to get a Tested-by for this series to make sure it does not break current users.
It's a miracle it even works for the current users, given the wrong way the current code writes to GRF registers, which makes it to have no intended effect, etc.
Anyway, is there some upper limit to wait for Tested-by? 2 months seems excessive. Just so I can remind myself sooner next time. :)
I can understand a few weeks, but 2 months just deters contributions.
I usually apply new patches during the merge window (we have three months release cycle) and this patch series was sent when the merge window was closed. If patches are bug fixes (like in this case) I prefer to get them tested by someone who has the actual hardware. When there is an Acked-by or Tested-by, then I apply the fixes for -rcX. We already had several cases in the past where simple and obvious timing fixes in the driver broke display support for in tree boards, therefore I'm somewhat reluctant to apply fixes for -rcX without Tested-by.
Thanks for explanation and for applying the patches.
kind regards, Ondrej
-- Anatolij