Re: [GIT PULL] USB fixes for 5.14-rc3

[Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Sun, Jul 25, 2021 at 04:53:03PM +0000, Minas Harutyunyan wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> On 7/25/2021 8:15 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 25, 2021 at 04:05:11PM +0000, Minas Harutyunyan wrote:
> >> Hi  Greg,
> >> On 7/23/2021 6:53 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> >>> The following changes since commit e73f0f0ee7541171d89f2e2491130c7771ba58d3:
> >>>
> >>>     Linux 5.14-rc1 (2021-07-11 15:07:40 -0700)
> >>>
> >>> are available in the Git repository at:
> >>>
> >>>     git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/usb.git tags/usb-5.14-rc3
> >>>
> >>> for you to fetch changes up to 1d1b97d5e7636d72890a5bdd0b40e980e54b2d34:
> >>>
> >>>     Merge tag 'usb-serial-5.14-rc3' of https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/johan/usb-serial__;!!A4F2R9G_pg!MJ8qYQZESfA6SADfkbKTOvLpPUIWj9rC0lSEDjqrLPEJjfiuWPCWgzU0Yi_Vb7wC7J3PJwdX$  into usb-linus (2021-07-22 20:51:14 +0200)
> >>>
> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> USB fixes for 5.14-rc3
> >>>
> >>> Here are some USB fixes for 5.14-rc3 to resolve a bunch of tiny problems
> >>> reported.  Included in here are:
> >>> 	- dtsi revert to resolve a problem which broke android systems
> >>> 	  that relied on the dts name to find the USB controller device.
> >>> 	  People are still working out the "real" solution for this, but
> >>> 	  for now the revert is needed.
> >>> 	- core USB fix for pipe calculation found by syzbot
> >>> 	- typec fixes
> >>> 	- gadget driver fixes
> >>> 	- new usb-serial device ids
> >>> 	- new USB quirks
> >>> 	- xhci fixes
> >>> 	- usb hub fixes for power management issues reported
> >>> 	- other tiny fixes
> >>>
> >>> All have been in linux-next with no reported problems.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Marek Szyprowski (1):
> >>>         usb: dwc2: Skip clock gating on Samsung SoCs
> >>>
> >>
> >> I didn't ACK this patch. Me and Marek Szyprowski agreed to discuss
> >> details of this patch after he will back from vacation after August 2.
> > 
> > Ok, so should I revert it now that it is in Linus's tree?  Did I miss
> > the discussion that said there were problems with it?  I see an ack for
> > the patch, what was wrong with that?
> > 
> Yes, please revert it until we discuss with author details of patch.
> Actually I have replied to this patch with some questions and additional 
> testing request.
> Patch was ACKed-by Krzysztof Kozlowski 
> <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com>, but not by me.

Sure, but what is wrong with this change?  As this fixes a regression,
shouldn't it stay in the tree for now?

thanks,

greg k-h