Patch "[PATCH] Revert "usb: musb: fix tx fifo flush handling again"" has been added to the 3.18-stable tree
Subsystems (3)
This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
[PATCH] Revert "usb: musb: fix tx fifo flush handling again"
to the 3.18-stable tree which can be found at:
http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary
The filename of the patch is:
revert-usb-musb-fix-tx-fifo-flush-handling-again.patch
and it can be found in the queue-3.18 subdirectory.
If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree, please let <[email protected]> know about it.
Quoted 1 line
From
817bdbb406234e405e01790dfc6fffd91a15367eMon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 12:31:05 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Revert "usb: musb: fix tx fifo flush handling again"
This reverts commit 98b91bfa5e478b9bf332f9f149b1c25ffd58f877 which is commit 45d73860530a14c608f410b91c6c341777bfa85d upstream.
It should not have been applied to the 3.18-stable tree at all.
--- drivers/usb/musb/musb_host.c | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
drivers/usb/musb/musb_host.c +0 -1
@@ -1294,7 +1294,6 @@ void musb_host_tx(struct musb *musb, u8 | MUSB_TXCSR_TXPKTRDY); }return ; -mdelay (1 ); } done:
Patches currently in stable-queue which might be from [email protected] are
queue-3.18/qlge-avoid-memcpy-buffer-overflow.patch queue-3.18/revert-net-phy-correctly-process-phy_halted-in-phy_stop_machine.patch queue-3.18/f2fs-check-hot_data-for-roll-forward-recovery.patch queue-3.18/ipv6-fix-memory-leak-with-multiple-tables-during-netns-destruction.patch queue-3.18/tcp-initialize-rcv_mss-to-tcp_min_mss-instead-of-0.patch queue-3.18/ipv6-fix-typo-in-fib6_net_exit.patch queue-3.18/ipv6-accept-64k-1-packet-length-in-ip6_find_1stfragopt.patch queue-3.18/revert-usb-musb-fix-tx-fifo-flush-handling-again.patch
Bin Liu
maintainerHi Greg,
Quoted 21 lines · On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 12:34:14PM +0200, [email protected] wrote:
This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
[PATCH] Revert "usb: musb: fix tx fifo flush handling again"
to the 3.18-stable tree which can be found at:
http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summaryThe filename of the patch is:
revert-usb-musb-fix-tx-fifo-flush-handling-again.patch
and it can be found in the queue-3.18 subdirectory.If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree, please let <[email protected]> know about it.
From
817bdbb406234e405e01790dfc6fffd91a15367eMon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 12:31:05 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Revert "usb: musb: fix tx fifo flush handling again"
Quoted 4 lines
This reverts commit
98b91bfa5e478b9bf332f9f149b1c25ffd58f877which is commit45d73860530a14c608f410b91c6c341777bfa85dupstream.It should not have been applied to the 3.18-stable tree at all.
The original commit 45d73860530a14c608f410b91c6c341777bfa85d upstream does mention it is applicable to v4.4+,
Cc: [email protected] # v4.4+
but it doesn't have 'Fixes ...' line.
What is the best format of a commit message to help to prevent this incident happen again?
Regards,
-Bin.
Greg KH
maintainerQuoted 32 lines · Bin Liu
Hi Greg,
Quoted 21 lines · On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 12:34:14PM +0200, [email protected] wrote:
This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
[PATCH] Revert "usb: musb: fix tx fifo flush handling again"
to the 3.18-stable tree which can be found at:
http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summaryThe filename of the patch is:
revert-usb-musb-fix-tx-fifo-flush-handling-again.patch
and it can be found in the queue-3.18 subdirectory.If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree, please let <[email protected]> know about it.
From
817bdbb406234e405e01790dfc6fffd91a15367eMon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 12:31:05 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Revert "usb: musb: fix tx fifo flush handling again"Quoted 4 lines
This reverts commit
98b91bfa5e478b9bf332f9f149b1c25ffd58f877which is commit45d73860530a14c608f410b91c6c341777bfa85dupstream.It should not have been applied to the 3.18-stable tree at all.
The original commit
45d73860530a14c608f410b91c6c341777bfa85dupstream does mention it is applicable to v4.4+,
Quoted 6 lines
Cc: [email protected] # v4.4+but it doesn't have 'Fixes ...' line.
What is the best format of a commit message to help to prevent this incident happen again?
You did it right, I missed it when I was applying patches, sorry, my fault.
greg k-h
Bin Liu
maintainerQuoted 35 lines · Greg KH
Quoted 34 lines · Bin Liu
Hi Greg,
Quoted 21 lines · On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 12:34:14PM +0200, [email protected] wrote:
This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled
[PATCH] Revert "usb: musb: fix tx fifo flush handling again"
to the 3.18-stable tree which can be found at:
http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summaryThe filename of the patch is:
revert-usb-musb-fix-tx-fifo-flush-handling-again.patch
and it can be found in the queue-3.18 subdirectory.If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree, please let <[email protected]> know about it.
From
817bdbb406234e405e01790dfc6fffd91a15367eMon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 12:31:05 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Revert "usb: musb: fix tx fifo flush handling again"Quoted 4 lines
This reverts commit
98b91bfa5e478b9bf332f9f149b1c25ffd58f877which is commit45d73860530a14c608f410b91c6c341777bfa85dupstream.It should not have been applied to the 3.18-stable tree at all.
The original commit
45d73860530a14c608f410b91c6c341777bfa85dupstream does mention it is applicable to v4.4+,Cc: [email protected] # v4.4+
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
but it doesn't have 'Fixes ...' line.
What is the best format of a commit message to help to prevent this incident happen again?
You did it right, I missed it when I was applying patches, sorry, my fault.
No worries. I guess every maintainer has their automation setup, so just wanted to check if there is anything in patch submission could be done better.
Regards,
-Bin.