On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 02:46:46PM +0100, Alexander Stein wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 22. Februar 2024, 14:06:12 CET schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman: > > On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 11:16:59AM +0100, Alexander Stein wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > CC'ing Sean as well. > > > > > > Am Donnerstag, 22. Februar 2024, 08:47:28 CET schrieb Greg Kroah-Hartman: > > > > On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 04:29:04PM +0100, Alexander Stein wrote: > > > > > Hi Greg, > > > > > > > > > > on the usb-next tree [1] the patch 'usb: phy: generic: Get the vbus supply > > > > > has been applied twice: > > > > > * 03e607cbb2931374db1825f371e9c7f28526d3f4 > > > > > > > > This is from the 5.18 release, from this email series: > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220425171412.1188485-3-sean.anderson@xxxxxxxx/ > > > > from 2022. > > > > > > > > > * 75fd6485cccef269ac9eb3b71cf56753341195ef > > > > > > > > This is from a newer series: > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240123225111.1629405-3-sean.anderson@xxxxxxxx/ > > > > that I applied from there. > > > > > > > > So how did it apply cleanly twice? > > > > > > Apparently the series from 2024 is v3 from the older v2 one. For some reason > > > only patch 2/4 from v2 got applied before. v3 seems to be a rebase where the > > > apply went unnoticed but the patch is again part of the series :( > > > > > > > > causing my board imx8mm-tqma8mqml-mba8mx.dts failing to probe USB phy: > > > > > [ 11.006720] usb_phy_generic usbphynop1: error -EPERM: could not get vbus regulator > > > > > [ 11.017817] usb_phy_generic: probe of usbphynop1 failed with error -1 > > > > > > > > > > Reverting/removing the patch fix my problem. > > > > > > > > Which patch? All of the ones in that last series? If so, why did it > > > > apply at all? > > > > > > In my case I reverted 75fd6485cccef269ac9eb3b71cf56753341195ef from > > > usb-next, because that very change has been applied with > > > 03e607cbb2931374db1825f371e9c7f28526d3f4 already. > > > > Can you send a patch that resolves this all properly? > > Which tree shall this patch apply to? usb-next? Yes. > Shall it revert 03e607cbb2931374db1825f371e9c7f28526d3f4 from v5.18 > or 75fd6485cccef269ac9eb3b71cf56753341195ef from usb-next? the "unique to usb-next" one please. Also realize that there was multiple patches in that series that were applied, can you check the others as well? thanks, greg k-h
