Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 23 May 2023 01:22:57 +0300 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] msm/drm/dsi: Round up DSC hdisplay calculation | From | Dmitry Baryshkov <> |
| |
On 23/05/2023 01:18, Marijn Suijten wrote: > On 2023-05-23 01:14:40, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: >> On Tue, 23 May 2023 at 00:45, Jessica Zhang <quic_jesszhan@quicinc.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On 5/22/2023 1:44 PM, Marijn Suijten wrote: >>>> On 2023-05-22 13:30:20, Jessica Zhang wrote: >>>>> Currently, when compression is enabled, hdisplay is reduced via integer >>>>> division. This causes issues for modes where the original hdisplay is >>>>> not a multiple of 3. >>>>> >>>>> To fix this, use DIV_ROUND_UP to divide hdisplay. >>>>> >>>>> Reviewed-by: Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@somainline.org> >>>>> Suggested-by: Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@somainline.org> >>>> >>>> Nit: probably these should go in the opposite order. And if they're >>>> all supposed to be chronological, I think it is: >>>> >>>> Suggested-by: >>>> Fixes: >>>> Signed-off-by: >>>> Reviewed-by: >>>> >>>> But unsure if that's a hard requirement, or even correct at all. >>> >>> Hi Marijn, >>> >>> I don't see any explicit documentation on the order of R-b tags. FWIW, I >>> see in the git log that S-o-b always goes at the bottom of the commit >>> message. >>> >>> I would prefer the S-o-b to always be at the bottom (as it helps me >>> avoid duplicate S-o-b's when doing `git commit -s`), though I can flip >>> the order of the R-b and suggested-by tags. >> >> I'd second Jessica here. Consider these tags as a history or a transcript: >> >> I would not vote on the particular order of the Suggested-by/Fixes >> tags, I don't think that is important. These come first. Then the >> patch goes through different cycles. of reviews, which gain >> Reviewed-by tags. >> >> In the same way Link/Patchwork/whatever other tags are added in the >> historical order. >> >> By having the submitter's S-o-b at the bottom, the submitter adds the >> final signature under everything else being stated/recorded. > > Correct, so the s-o-b can always be kept / moved back to the bottom on a > resend, stating that they sign off on "all that was written previously" > including picking up reviews. > > However, for the rest of your reply about "history / transcript", you > seem to agree exactly with my point of keeping (or rather, simply > appending) these in chronological order?
Yes.
> > - Marijn > >> >> Of course, in a more complicated story, there might be other >> developers taking part (Co-Developed-By + Signed-off-by), etc. >> >> Note: all described is just my perception and might differ from the >> BCP regarding the tags. > > <snip>
-- With best wishes Dmitry
| |