On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 01:26:02PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
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@linuxfoundation.org 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@vger.kernel.org.
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/driver...
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.
Ah, this one I had to apply before it hit linux-next due to issues with Mauro's delay at the time.
Sorry about that, all is good.
greg k-h