On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 08:17:40AM +0300, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx> [210609 12:00]:
> > * Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [210609 09:26]:
> > > On Fri, Jun 04, 2021 at 11:05:35AM +0300, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > > Simplify cable state handling a bit to leave out duplicated code.
> > > > We are just scheduling work and showing state info if a recheck is
> > > > needed. No intended functional changes.
> > > >
> > > > Cc: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Cc: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Cc: Bhushan Shah <bshah@xxxxxxx>
> > > > Cc: Drew Fustini <drew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Cc: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++------------------
> > > > 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > Does not apply to my usb-next branch, what tree/branch did you make this
> > > against?
> >
> > This was against Linux next last week, I'll take a look and
> > repost.
>
> Looks like the issue applying these patches is caused by commit
> b65ba0c362be ("usb: musb: fix MUSB_QUIRK_B_DISCONNECT_99 handling")
> that is in usb-linus but not in usb-next.
>
> Probably best to merge usb-linus to usb-next and then these patches
> apply no problem and a merge conflict is avoided?
>
> Let me know if you still want me to repost against usb-next, I can
> do that no problem if you prefer that :)
Now that I have merged usb-linus into usb-next, I can take these,
thanks.
greg k-h
