Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2024 11:56:17 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 276985] crash in LinuxKPI/drm Message-ID: <bug-276985-227-I8JoprU7Dp@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-276985-227@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-276985-227@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D276985 --- Comment #33 from feh@fehcom.de --- Hi, > My last question - if you are the drm module maintainer / developer - wou= ld it be=20 > possible to mark following ports with incremental numbers like 510, 515, = 610, not 61=20 > for a newest release please (61 < 515)? AFAIK those numbers come from the Linux development. The AMD people build t= heir drivers here and those numbers are related to the Kernel version: 5.15 =3D> Linux Kernel 5.15 6.1 =3D> Linux Kernel 6.1 (6.10 is current) It would not be a good idea to setup a new/different nameing scheme. As a developer/maintainer/porter I would rather stay close to upstream. --eh.=20 PS: Linus doesn't follow Semantic Versioning strictly, thus there is no real breaking difference between the 5.x and 6.y branch. This may change with Ru= st in the kernel, but this is a different story. PPS: So far, the new DRM seems to work well. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-276985-227-I8JoprU7Dp>