Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2026-09-18 12:44:43) > > On 18/09/2026 09:31, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > > On 2026-07-09 13:36:57 [+0200], Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > >> Hey, > > Hi Maarten, > > > >> Yeah the problem was similar, I believe neither check should exist, > >> instead the caller should give this information like the comment mentions. > > > > Any update here? Maybe I have been left out on reposts. Any chance this > > gets in before the LTS of this year gets out? > > Side question, there was a bunch of sashiko issues against v4 - have > those been addressed? > > As today it is the first time I see patch 7/7 which is a bit of a scary > one. I have to ask how much does Intel commit to fixing out any > potential breakage given the status of i915?
I'd say there is very close to zero chance of accepting patch 7. And that would take massive functional and performance validation efforts done by the person wanting the patch to get merged. And yes, there would also need to be commitment to fix any fallout by that same person in weekly -rc cadence. So please raise your hand, whoever wants to volunteer. There's already the earlier much smaller patch about vblank that needs to get reviewes and acceptance and it hasn't been able to be driven to completion. So projecting from that, I don't exactly expect patch like 7 in this series to get merged in any near future without somebody really stepping forward and signing to do all the validation and and perf regression testing. Regards, Joonas
