On Fri 23 Jul 10:54 CDT 2021, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:

On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 09:34:20AM -0500, Bjorn Andersson wrote:

quoted

On Fri 23 Jul 03:18 CDT 2021, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 03:09:37PM -0500, Bjorn Andersson wrote:

quoted

Which tree did you revert this in? 5.13.stable?)

My usb-linus branch which will go to Linus later today.  Then we can
backport the revert to older kernels as needed.

I'm not worried about the backports, I'm worried about conflicts you're
causing because you're taking a non-usb patch through the usb tree.

I was about to push a revert (to this and the other Qualcomm platforms),
but as you're taking some set of reverts through the usb tree we're just
in for a bunch of merge conflicts.

It shouldn't be a merge conflict as you can apply the same revert to
your tree now and keep on merging.  When you pick up 5.14-rc3 from Linus
it should merge "correctly", right?

I typically don't merge back the -rcs into my -next branch, is that
common practice?


But I still don't understand why you insist on driving this through your
tree. I've asked you several times to show me on the patch so I at least
can Ack it. I made a mistake, but why do you insist on keeping me - the
maintainer - out of the loop?

Regards,
Bjorn