On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 06:21:24PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 11:34:43AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 05:11:04PM +0200, gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > >
> > > The patch below does not apply to the 6.0-stable tree.
> > > If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm
> > > tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit
> > > id to <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>.
> > >
> > > Possible dependencies:
> > >
> > > 41fd1cb61514 ("media: mceusb: Use new usb_control_msg_*() routines")
> >
> > Greg:
> >
> > I can submit a patch for the -stable trees that fixes the problem
> > reported by syzbot without converting the mceusb driver to use the new
> > usb_control_msg_*() routines. Would that be okay? Or do you prefer
> > simply not to include this patch (which merely fixes a warning) in the
> > stable kernels?
>
> If it's just a warning, no need to really worry about it. But note that
> the usb_control_msg_*() functions are in 5.10.y and newer kernels, so
> maybe just do this using the real functions for 5.15 and 6.0?
Now I'm getting puzzled. I just took a look at
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/tree/drivers/media/rc/mceusb.c?h=linux-5.10.y
and the same with "5.15" or "6.0" in place of "5.10", and in all three
of them this patch has already been applied! They are commits
587f793c64d9, 75913c562f5b, and 608e58a0f461 respectively.
So it looks like there really is no problem except that for some reason
your scripts are trying to apply patches to -stable trees which already
contain them.
Alan Stern
