On Sat, 2019-03-30 at 21:23 +0100, Greg KH wrote:
On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 01:06:23PM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
On Sat, 2019-03-30 at 20:57 +0100, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
The patch below does not apply to the 4.9-stable tree. If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit id to stable@vger.kernel.org.
[...]
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 4.11+ Fixes: 749494b6bdbb ("usb: gadget: f_hid: fix: Move IN request allocation to set_alt()")
The cc: stable specifies 4.11+ because the commit it fixes went in in the 4.11 merge window. Is there something incorrect with the tagging that makes you think it should apply to 4.9?
Commit 749494b6bdbb originally showed up in 4.11, but it was then backported to 4.10.2 and 4.9.90. That is why I tried to apply it to 4.9.y and when it did not work, sent out the rejection notice.
Turns out there's a missing patch:
commit 25cd9721c2b16ee0d775e36ec3af31f392003f80 Author: Krzysztof Opasiak k.opasiak@samsung.com Date: Tue Jan 31 18:12:31 2017 +0100
usb: gadget: f_hid: fix: Don't access hidg->req without spinlock held
It changes one of the match lines from
status = usb_ep_queue(hidg->in_ep, hidg->req, GFP_ATOMIC);
to
status = usb_ep_queue(hidg->in_ep, req, GFP_ATOMIC);
which is why you get the rejection.
James