[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Yk1EcpVPLSZbE0Xx@kroah.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 09:42:42 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@...x.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>,
Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>,
Marcelo Roberto Jimenez <marcelo.jimenez@...il.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.16 0018/1017] Revert "gpio: Revert regression in
sysfs-gpio (gpiolib.c)"
On Tue, Apr 05, 2022 at 11:28:52PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > [ Upstream commit 56e337f2cf1326323844927a04e9dbce9a244835 ]
> >
> > This reverts commit fc328a7d1fcce263db0b046917a66f3aa6e68719.
> >
> > This commit - while attempting to fix a regression - has caused a number
> > of other problems. As the fallout from it is more significant than the
> > initial problem itself, revert it for now before we find a correct
> > solution.
>
> The patch this reverts is queued as 15/ in the series. Rather than
> applying broken patch and then reverting, it would be better to drop
> both, right?
No, this way we don't accidentally add the patch back when the scripts
go "hey, you forgot this old commit!"
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists