Re: [Pull Request] xhci: Step 1 to fix usb-linus and usb-next.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 07:09:57PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 06:43:55PM -0700, Sarah Sharp wrote:
> > The following changes since commit ff8a43c10f1440f07a5faca0c1556921259f7f76:
> > 
> >   USB: keyspan: fix null-deref at disconnect and release (2013-08-14 12:49:27 -0700)
> > 
> > are available in the git repository at:
> > 
> >   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sarah/xhci.git tags/for-usb-2013-08-15-step-1
> > 
> > for you to fetch changes up to 52fb61250a7a132b0cfb9f4a1060a1f3c49e5a25:
> > 
> >   xhci-plat: Don't enable legacy PCI interrupts. (2013-08-15 10:52:36 -0700)
> > 
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > xhci: Step 1 to fix usb-linus and usb-next.
> > 
> > Hi Greg,
> > 
> > This is the first of three steps to fix your usb-linus and usb-next
> > trees.  As I mentioned, commit 4fae6f0fa86f92e6bc7429371b1e177ad0aaac66
> > "USB: handle LPM errors during device suspend correctly" was incorrectly
> > added to usb-next when it should have been added to usb-linus and marked
> > for stable.
> > 
> > Two port power off bug fixes touch the same code that patch touches, but
> > it's not easy to simply move commit 4fae6f0f patch to usb-linus because
> > commit 28e861658e23ca94692f98e245d254c75c8088a7 "USB: refactor code for
> > enabling/disabling remote wakeup" also touched those code sections.
> 
> How "severe" are these fixes needed at the moment, so late in the
> release cycle?  They all seem to involve fixes for stuff that has been
> in prior -final releases, nothing new fixing regressions that showed up
> after 3.11-rc1, right?
> 
> In other words, as these touch core USB code, I'd prefer, if at all
> possible, to wait for the 3.12-rc1 merge window for stuff like this.
> Especially if it is for issues that people don't really hit that often /
> at all.

In reviewing these, I don't see anything that is all that urgent, so,
can I just pull both of these branches (assuming the second one really
is the correct one, based on the comment, I'm not sure), into usb-next?
That way the patches will properly be queued up for -stable releases,
and they get some testing time in linux-next.

thanks,

greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Media]     [Linux Input]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Old Linux USB Devel Archive]

  Powered by Linux