On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 10:08:57AM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 08:39:58AM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote: > > Hello, > > > > On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 03:55:43PM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > > > Should this fix go through the cgroup tree? > > > > I haven't been routing any dmem patches. Might as well stick to drm tree? > > We merged the dmem cgroup through drm because we also had driver > changes, but going forward, as far as I'm concerned, it's "your" thing, > and it really shouldn't go through drm
I guess we could also route it through drm-misc. Either way I think we need a MAINTAINERS entry for dmem so that dri-devel gets cc'ed. And then make a decision on which git repo should be the standard path. I think either is fine, but at least for now it looks like most interactions are between dmem and drm, and not between dmem and cgroups at large. And in any case we can just ack patches for going the other path on a case-by-case basis. Cheers, Sima -- Simona Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch
