Re: [GIT PULL] MMC updates for v7.0

[Ulf Hansson]

On Wed, 11 Feb 2026 at 22:29, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 11 Feb 2026 at 19:32, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 9 Feb 2026 at 05:34, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > Note that, this time I have picked up some changes to improve the mux subsystem
> > > and those are part of this pull-request, as these changes are required for mmc.
> >
> > No.
> >
> > Those changes are complete garbage and don't even compile. It has
> > apparently never been in linux-next or been build-tested in any way.
> >
> > When CONFIG_MULTIPLEXER=m, we build that core.o file
> >
> >    obj-$(CONFIG_MULTIPLEXER)  += mux-core.o
> >
> > but in include/linux/mux/consumer.h you have
> >
> >    #ifdef CONFIG_MULTIPLEXER
> >
> > which won't be true (because what will be defined is
> > CONFIG_MULTIPLEXER_MODULE), so then you get a long stream of things
> > like
> >
> >   drivers/mux/core.c:312:14: error: redefinition of ‘mux_control_states’
> >
> > because the mux/consumer.h header will have defined the dummy wrapper function.
> >
> > In other words, that commit ad314348ceb4 ("mux: Add helper functions
> > for getting optional and selected mux-state") is pure unadulterated
> > untested garbage.
> >
> > I do not want to see a "fixed" pull request from you. This was
> > entirely unacceptable, and I will not be pulling anything more from
> > you this merge window.
> >
> > Stop sending me untested crap that hasn't been in linux-next and
> > doesn't even pass the most cursory smell test.
> >
> > You can try again for 7.1, but only if it has been actually in
> > linux-next and properly tested.
>
> Hi Linus,
>
> Sorry for the mess!
>
> I queued up the mux patches on Wed 4th last week (which is certainly a
> stretch that is unusual for me), but they did not reach linux-next for
> some reason, which I should have paid attention to. So, I simply
> trusted the build boots not reporting any errors to me, believing
> everything was fine.

FYI, this turned out to be a really silly issue on my end. My old
email filter was tagging emails from Stephen and simply didn't catch
the build error-report from Mark the 5th.

I thought it was important to share this, as the above reply from me
kind of indicated that there was a hiccup with the integration of my
mmc tree in linux-next, while there certainly isn't. Mark rightfully
throwed away my latest next branch, because it was broken.

That said, my other pull-request for pmdomain [1] should be perfectly
fine for you to pull, it's been tested thoroughly in linux-next, but I
fully understand if you rather not at this point.

[...]

Kind regards
Uffe

[1]
[GIT PULL] pmdomain updates for v7.0
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260209124757.554032-1-ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx/