linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 03/11] HID: hid-input: add usage_index argument in input

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

Date:	Tue, 30 Oct 2012 11:09:46 +0100
From:	Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...il.com>
To:	Henrik Rydberg <rydberg@...omail.se>
Cc:	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
	Stephane Chatty <chatty@...c.fr>, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/11] HID: hid-input: add usage_index argument in
 input_mapping and event.

On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 8:25 PM, Henrik Rydberg <rydberg@...omail.se> wrote:
> Hi Benjamin,
>
>> Currently, there is no way to know the index of the current field
>> in the .input_mapping and .event callbacks  when this field is inside
>> an array of HID fields.
>> This patch forwards this index to the input_mapping and event
>> callbacks.
>
> I agree with the idea, but the function argument list is becoming
> ridiculously long... Could we remove the usage pointer argument, at
> least?

yeah, totally agree. Let me just check whether it will not introduce
more problems than it solves for my driver.

>
>         int (*event)(struct hid_device *hdev, struct hid_field *field,
>                         unsigned int usage_index, __s32 value);
>
>
>> @@ -1071,19 +1072,24 @@ static void hid_input_field(struct hid_device *hid, struct hid_field *field,
>>       for (n = 0; n < count; n++) {
>>
>>               if (HID_MAIN_ITEM_VARIABLE & field->flags) {
>> -                     hid_process_event(hid, field, &field->usage[n], value[n], interrupt);
>> +                     hid_process_event(hid, field, &field->usage[n], n,
>> +                             value[n], interrupt);
>>                       continue;
>>               }
>>
>>               if (field->value[n] >= min && field->value[n] <= max
>>                       && field->usage[field->value[n] - min].hid
>>                       && search(value, field->value[n], count))
>> -                             hid_process_event(hid, field, &field->usage[field->value[n] - min], 0, interrupt);
>> +                             hid_process_event(hid, field,
>> +                                     &field->usage[field->value[n] - min], n,
>> +                                     0, interrupt);
>
> Wrong index?

oops, I'll have to check that.

Thanks,
Benjamin

>
>>
>>               if (value[n] >= min && value[n] <= max
>>                       && field->usage[value[n] - min].hid
>>                       && search(field->value, value[n], count))
>> -                             hid_process_event(hid, field, &field->usage[value[n] - min], 1, interrupt);
>> +                             hid_process_event(hid, field,
>> +                                     &field->usage[value[n] - min], n,
>> +                                     1, interrupt);
>
> Wrong index?
>
>>       }
>>
>>       memcpy(field->value, value, count * sizeof(__s32));
>
> Thanks,
> Henrik
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/