From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 728D8C4338F for ; Sat, 14 Aug 2021 18:17:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EFF260FF2 for ; Sat, 14 Aug 2021 18:17:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S238931AbhHNSRk (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Aug 2021 14:17:40 -0400 Received: from mxout03.lancloud.ru ([45.84.86.113]:51434 "EHLO mxout03.lancloud.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S238937AbhHNSRj (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Aug 2021 14:17:39 -0400 Received: from LanCloud DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mxout03.lancloud.ru CBC942061858 Received: from LanCloud Received: from LanCloud Received: from LanCloud From: Sergey Shtylyov Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] Stop calling request_irq(), etc. with invalid IRQs in the USB drivers` To: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Sergey Shtylyov CC: , Felipe Balbi References: Organization: Open Mobile Platform Message-ID: Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2021 21:16:59 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [192.168.11.198] X-ClientProxiedBy: LFEXT02.lancloud.ru (fd00:f066::142) To LFEX1907.lancloud.ru (fd00:f066::207) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org On 8/14/21 4:34 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >>>> Here are 2 patches against the 'usb-linus' branch of GregKH's 'usb.git' repo. >>> >>> Wait, why that branch? >> >> What branch I'd use for the fixes then? > > Ah, you really want this in for 5.14-final? Not necessarily, it's your call. But all the patches are fixes. > People are hitting this issue now? No, the patches ware all the result of the code reviews... >>> Please make them against the branch you want >>> them applied to. Hopefully they will apply to the usb-next branch... >> >> I didn't intend them for usb-next but looks like they apply there too. > > I think it belongs there as a "nice cleanup to have", right? No, they're definitely not cleanups and all have the "Fixes:" tags, so going to end up in the stable trees (some already have). There's going to be 10-patch series soon, all fixing the deferred probing due to platfrorm_get_irq()... Luckily, the USB tree doesn't shave the 3rd kind of platfrorm_get_irq() bugs: treating 0 as error and returning it immediately along with the negative values, without doing the remaining part of probe... > thanks, > > greg k-h MBR, Sergey