Re: Patch "usb: dwc3: qcom: fix peripheral and OTG suspend" has been added to the 5.19-stable tree

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Mon, Sep 05, 2022 at 09:36:07AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 05, 2022 at 03:23:13PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 05, 2022 at 09:17:41AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 05, 2022 at 03:13:09PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > > >On Mon, Sep 05, 2022 at 09:04:44AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > > >> On Mon, Sep 05, 2022 at 02:58:31PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > > >> >On Mon, Sep 05, 2022 at 08:53:09AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > > >> >>     Fixes: 6895ea55c385 ("usb: dwc3: qcom: Configure wakeup interrupts during suspend")
> > > >> >
> > > >> >This commit doesn't exist in 5.19 (and earlier trees), shouldn't your
> > > >> >scripts check for that?
> > > >>
> > > >> They do - it was backported to 5.19.
> > > >
> > > >What?! Why on earth would 6895ea55c385 ("usb: dwc3: qcom: Configure
> > > >wakeup interrupts during suspend") be backported to stable?
> > > >
> > > >Please drop that patch instead. It's essentially a new feature and is in
> > > >any case in no way stable material.
> > > 
> > > Right, it was picked up as a dependency of a872ab303d5d ("usb: dwc3: qcom: fix use-after-free on runtime-PM wakeup")
> > 
> > That's wrong too, it's not a dependency for that fix.
> 
> Right, it may not strictly be one, but we're trying to bring in
> dependencies as is without modifying the patch is it's far less error
> prone, and keeps future backports easy, as long as backporting those
> isn't riskier.
> 
> In this case, if I were to drop a872ab303d5d I'd also need to drop:
> 
> a872ab303d5d ("usb: dwc3: qcom: fix use-after-free on runtime-PM wakeup")
> 6498a96c8c9c ("usb: dwc3: qcom: fix runtime PM wakeup")
> 
> > So does this mean you're dropping the patches that should not be
> > backported?
> 
> Having said the above, at the end it's your patches and your call, let
> me know if you're okay with dropping a872ab303d5d, a872ab303d5d, and
> 6498a96c8c9c from all trees and I'll do that.

Yes, please drop all of those, they don't belong in stable kernels,
otherwise I would have added a cc: stable tag :)

thanks,

greg k-h