Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 27 Sep 2022 07:47:34 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@kernel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org,
        Oliver Neukum <oneukum@suse.com>,
        Jean-Francois Le Fillatre <jflf_kernel@gmx.com>,
        stable <stable@kernel.org>, Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.19 014/207] Revert "usb: add quirks for Lenovo OneLink+
 Dock"
Message-ID: <YzKOdhT7jTXwCaG8@kroah.com>
References: <20220926100806.522017616@linuxfoundation.org>
 <20220926100807.118539823@linuxfoundation.org>
 <d9d9651b-2561-03ce-8076-5b471929ff2d@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <d9d9651b-2561-03ce-8076-5b471929ff2d@kernel.org>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 07:23:46AM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> I wonder, does it make sense to queue the commit (as 011/207) and
> immediately its revert (the patch below) in a single release? I doubt
> that...
> 
> The same holds for 012 (patch) + 015 (revert).

Yes it does, otherwise tools will pick up "hey, you forgot this patch
that should have been applied here!" all the time.  Having the patch,
and the revert, in the tree prevents that from happening.

thanks,

greg k-h