linux-kernel - Re: [ANNOUNCE] System Inactivity Monitor v1.0

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

Date:	Sat, 27 Jan 2007 17:45:25 +0000
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	Alessandro Di Marco <dmr@....it>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, vojtech@...e.cz
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] System Inactivity Monitor v1.0

Hi!

>    Well, I do not think your kernel code is mergeable. But bits to enable
>    similar functionality in userspace probably would be mergeable.
> 
> You said it :-)
> 
> This patch exports to the user space the inactivity time (in msecs) of a given
> input device. Example follows:

Looks okay to me. I guess you should sign it off, and ask Dmitry
(input maintainer) for a merge?


> <0> $ cat /proc/bus/input/activity
> 0011 0001 0001 ab41     1
> 0011 0002 0008 0000     3160799
> 0011 0002 0008 7321     549991
> 0019 0000 0005 0000     3160799
> 0019 0000 0001 0000     3454901
> 0010 104d 0000 0000     3160799
> 0010 104d 0000 0000     2162833
> 
> The device ordering matches the /proc/bus/input/devices one, anyway I reported
> also vendor, product, etc. Now the daemon is trivial...

> @@ -482,6 +484,30 @@
>  	return seq_open(file, &input_devices_seq_ops);
>  }
>  
> +static int input_activity_seq_show(struct seq_file *seq, void *v)
> +{
> +	struct input_dev *dev = container_of(v, struct input_dev, node);
> +
> +	seq_printf(seq, "%04x %04x %04x %04x\t%u\n",
> +		   dev->id.bustype, dev->id.vendor,
> +		   dev->id.product, dev->id.version,
> +		   jiffies_to_msecs((long) jiffies - (long) dev->last_activity));
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static struct seq_operations input_activity_seq_ops = {
> +	.start	= input_devices_seq_start,
> +	.next	= input_devices_seq_next,
> +	.stop	= input_devices_seq_stop,
> +	.show	= input_activity_seq_show,
> +};
> +
> +static int input_proc_activity_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> +{
> +	return seq_open(file, &input_activity_seq_ops);
> +}
> +
>  static struct file_operations input_devices_fileops = {
>  	.owner		= THIS_MODULE,
>  	.open		= input_proc_devices_open,
> @@ -491,6 +517,15 @@
>  	.release	= seq_release,
>  };
>  
> +static struct file_operations input_activity_fileops = {
> +	.owner		= THIS_MODULE,
> +	.open		= input_proc_activity_open,
> +	.poll		= input_proc_devices_poll,
> +	.read		= seq_read,
> +	.llseek		= seq_lseek,
> +	.release	= seq_release,
> +};
> +
>  static void *input_handlers_seq_start(struct seq_file *seq, loff_t *pos)
>  {
>  	/* acquire lock here ... Yes, we do need locking, I knowi, I know... */
> @@ -558,15 +593,23 @@
>  	entry->owner = THIS_MODULE;
>  	entry->proc_fops = &input_devices_fileops;
>  
> -	entry = create_proc_entry("handlers", 0, proc_bus_input_dir);
> +	entry = create_proc_entry("activity", 0, proc_bus_input_dir);
>  	if (!entry)
>  		goto fail2;
>  
>  	entry->owner = THIS_MODULE;
> +	entry->proc_fops = &input_activity_fileops;
> +
> +	entry = create_proc_entry("handlers", 0, proc_bus_input_dir);
> +	if (!entry)
> +		goto fail3;
> +
> +	entry->owner = THIS_MODULE;
>  	entry->proc_fops = &input_handlers_fileops;
>  
>  	return 0;
>  
> + fail3:	remove_proc_entry("activity", proc_bus_input_dir);
>   fail2:	remove_proc_entry("devices", proc_bus_input_dir);
>   fail1: remove_proc_entry("input", proc_bus);
>  	return -ENOMEM;
> diff -ur OLD/include/linux/input.h NEW/include/linux/input.h
> --- OLD/include/linux/input.h	2007-01-26 16:59:38.000000000 +0100
> +++ NEW/include/linux/input.h	2007-01-26 17:31:29.000000000 +0100
> @@ -949,6 +949,8 @@
>  	const char *uniq;
>  	struct input_id id;
>  
> +	unsigned long last_activity;
> +	
>  	unsigned long evbit[NBITS(EV_MAX)];
>  	unsigned long keybit[NBITS(KEY_MAX)];
>  	unsigned long relbit[NBITS(REL_MAX)];

> 
> -- 
> I don't think anyone should write their autobiography until after they're
> dead. - Samuel Goldwyn


-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
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/