mbox series

[v1,0/2] HID: Revert catchall handling of Bluetooth device in hid-logitech-hidpp

Message ID 20221207142433.1158329-1-benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com
Headers
Series HID: Revert catchall handling of Bluetooth device in hid-logitech-hidpp |

Message

Benjamin Tissoires Dec. 7, 2022, 2:24 p.m. UTC 
  We are basically too late in the 6.1 cycle to be able to do anything
else. Let's revert these 2 patches as we are in a situation where we
would break too many users.

We will reintroduce them during the next cycle with proper fixes in the
driver.

Cheers,
Benjamin

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-input/CAJZ5v0g-_o4AqMgNwihCb0jrwrcJZfRrX=jv8aH54WNKO7QB8A@mail.gmail.com/

Benjamin Tissoires (2):
  Revert "HID: logitech-hidpp: Remove special-casing of Bluetooth
    devices"
  Revert "HID: logitech-hidpp: Enable HID++ for all the Logitech
    Bluetooth devices"

 drivers/hid/hid-logitech-hidpp.c | 28 +++++++++-------------------
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)

Comments

Jiri Kosina Dec. 7, 2022, 4:57 p.m. UTC | #1 
On Wed, 7 Dec 2022, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:

> We are basically too late in the 6.1 cycle to be able to do anything
> else. Let's revert these 2 patches as we are in a situation where we
> would break too many users.
> 
> We will reintroduce them during the next cycle with proper fixes in the
> driver.

Rafael,

it would be nice to get

	Reported-by:
	Tested-by:

for these reverts if possible.

Thanks!
Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) Dec. 8, 2022, 7:01 a.m. UTC | #2 
On 07.12.22 17:57, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Dec 2022, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
> 
>> We are basically too late in the 6.1 cycle to be able to do anything
>> else. Let's revert these 2 patches as we are in a situation where we
>> would break too many users.
>>
>> We will reintroduce them during the next cycle with proper fixes in the
>> driver.
> 
> it would be nice to get
> 
> 	Reported-by:

Nitpicking: and as for nearly every Reported-by it would be nice to have
an accompanying Link: tag pointing to the report, which makes my
regression tracking life a whole lot easier *and* is nice for future
code archaeologist, as it makes it easier to find Rafael's great
analysis of the cause -- which is why Linus want to see these tags, too
[1] (and why our docs tell people to add them[2]).

Ciao, Thorsten

[1] for details, see:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAHk-=wjMmSZzMJ3Xnskdg4+GGz=5p5p+GSYyFBTh0f-DgvdBWg@mail.gmail.com/
https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAHk-=wgs38ZrfPvy=nOwVkVzjpM3VFU1zobP37Fwd_h9iAD5JQ@mail.gmail.com/
https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAHk-=wjxzafG-=J8oT30s7upn4RhBs6TX-uVFZ5rME+L5_DoJA@mail.gmail.com/

[2] see Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
(http://docs.kernel.org/process/submitting-patches.html) and
Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst
(https://docs.kernel.org/process/5.Posting.html)
Jiri Kosina Dec. 8, 2022, 7:24 p.m. UTC | #3 
On Wed, 7 Dec 2022, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:

> We are basically too late in the 6.1 cycle to be able to do anything
> else. Let's revert these 2 patches as we are in a situation where we
> would break too many users.
> 
> We will reintroduce them during the next cycle with proper fixes in the
> driver.

I have now queued this in for-6.1/upstream-fixes and will urgently send it 
to Linus so that we don't have the regression in 6.1 final.
Rafael J. Wysocki Dec. 12, 2022, 5:03 p.m. UTC | #4 
On Wednesday, December 7, 2022 5:57:47 PM CET Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Dec 2022, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
> 
> > We are basically too late in the 6.1 cycle to be able to do anything
> > else. Let's revert these 2 patches as we are in a situation where we
> > would break too many users.
> > 
> > We will reintroduce them during the next cycle with proper fixes in the
> > driver.
> 
> Rafael,
> 
> it would be nice to get
> 
> 	Reported-by:
> 	Tested-by:
> 
> for these reverts if possible.

I had been offline for the previous 3 days, sorry.

I'll test 6.1 and let you know.
Rafael J. Wysocki Dec. 15, 2022, 2:48 p.m. UTC | #5 
On Monday, December 12, 2022 6:03:07 PM CET Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 7, 2022 5:57:47 PM CET Jiri Kosina wrote:
> > On Wed, 7 Dec 2022, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
> > 
> > > We are basically too late in the 6.1 cycle to be able to do anything
> > > else. Let's revert these 2 patches as we are in a situation where we
> > > would break too many users.
> > > 
> > > We will reintroduce them during the next cycle with proper fixes in the
> > > driver.
> > 
> > Rafael,
> > 
> > it would be nice to get
> > 
> > 	Reported-by:
> > 	Tested-by:
> > 
> > for these reverts if possible.
> 
> I had been offline for the previous 3 days, sorry.
> 
> I'll test 6.1 and let you know.

Sorry for the delay.

I have tested final 6.1 on the affected machine and I can confirm that it works well.

Thanks!