Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751643AbdLUIax (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Dec 2017 03:30:53 -0500 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:47256 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750885AbdLUIau (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Dec 2017 03:30:50 -0500 Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 09:30:52 +0100 From: "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" To: Brian Norris Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, Sukumar Ghorai , Amit K Bag , Oliver Neukum , Marcel Holtmann , Matthias Kaehlcke , Todd Broch , Rajat Jain , Miao Chou , sadashiva.rao.pv@intel.com, Guenter Roeck Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.4 009/115] Bluetooth: btusb: driver to enable the usb-wakeup feature Message-ID: <20171221083052.GA19501@kroah.com> References: <20171218152852.624624481@linuxfoundation.org> <20171220195112.GA1287@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20171220195112.GA1287@google.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1850 Lines: 44 On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 11:51:15AM -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > Hi Greg, > > On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 04:47:58PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > 4.4-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. > > I'm sorry, but I already objected to this one during the discussion > here: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10065483/ > [PATCH 4.13 03/28] Bluetooth: btusb: fix QCA Rome suspend/resume > > in which we pointed out a regression. The $subject patch does NOT > actually resolve the previous regression, though it might help to mask > it. The proper approach to resolve the above regression was to revert > the patch, not to backport the $subject patch. > > Regarding this patch, IIUC this is not a bugfix -- it's a feature > addition (e.g., for helping with BLE mouse wakeup), and it has already > been proven to break some user space (we have an internal bug tracking > this, but suffice it to say that we've already tried and reverted this > patch [1]). This patch massively increases the surface in which spurious > bluetooth activity can wake the system, and in some cases we never can > suspend the system at all. > > Unfortunately, Matthias was on vacation when you sent the review > request, so our team wasn't alerted properly. Can you please back this > out of all -stable branches? > > Or alternatively, if those I've added on CC disagree and are happy to > deal with the fallout of this patch...well, then that's fine. We can > revert this patch in our downstream kernels and reapply if/when we can > account for it properly :) As Linus's tree is also broken, being bug-compatible here is good, right? I can just apply the revert/fix patch when it lands in that tree, and all will be ok. Or is Linus's tree not broken now? Sorry, this whole thread has been really confusing... thanks, greg k-h