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

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAPDyKFrFez=tDXLqRmeS1qpnVMCUPi8POjYkbRGiwAhcT3shfA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2026 22:29:23 +0100
From: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] MMC updates for v7.0

On Wed, 11 Feb 2026 at 19:32, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 9 Feb 2026 at 05:34, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org> 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.

I already have a patch queued for the problem (we got the report last
day), not in the pull-request though.

Anyway, I understand your concern and will do better next time!

Kind regards
Uffe




>
>                      Linus