Re: [PATCH v4] usb: typec: ucsi: Fix busy loop on ASUS VivoBooks

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 09:21:39AM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Sept 2024 at 09:08, Christian A. Ehrhardt <lk@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 03:37:25PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On Fri, Sep 06, 2024 at 08:58:53AM +0200, Christian A. Ehrhardt wrote:
> > > > If the busy indicator is set, all other fields in CCI should be
> > > > clear according to the spec. However, some UCSI implementations do
> > > > not follow this rule and report bogus data in CCI along with the
> > > > busy indicator. Ignore the contents of CCI if the busy indicator is
> > > > set.
> > > >
> > > > If a command timeout is hit it is possible that the EVENT_PENDING
> > > > bit is cleared while connector work is still scheduled which can
> > > > cause the EVENT_PENDING bit to go out of sync with scheduled connector
> > > > work. Check and set the EVENT_PENDING bit on entry to
> > > > ucsi_handle_connector_change() to fix this.
> > > >
> > > > Finally, check UCSI_CCI_BUSY before the return code of ->sync_control.
> > > > This ensures that the command is cancelled even if ->sync_control
> > > > returns an error (most likely -ETIMEDOUT).
> > > >
> > > > Reported-by: Anurag Bijea <icaliberdev@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Closes: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=219108
> > > > Bisected-by: Christian Heusel <christian@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Tested-by: Anurag Bijea <icaliberdev@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Fixes: de52aca4d9d5 ("usb: typec: ucsi: Never send a lone connector change ack")
> > > > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Signed-off-by: Christian A. Ehrhardt <lk@xxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/usb/typec/ucsi/ucsi.c | 18 ++++++++++++------
> > > >  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > Does not apply to my usb-next branch :(
> > >
> > > Can you rebase and resend this?  Or wait until -rc1 is out and rebase
> > > and resend then?
> >
> > I sent a v5 rebased onto usb-next.
> 
> Note, it wasn't marked as v5, it didn't contain a changelog, etc.
> Please consider using the `b4` tool to send patches. It automates
> versioning, changelog generation, etc.

Yes, this needs to be properly marked as such, my patch-bot already
noticed that :(