linux-kernel - Re: [linux-usb-devel] [DOC] The documentation for HID Simple Driver Interface 0.5.0

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]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0703052304070.10909@twin.jikos.cz>
Date:	Mon, 5 Mar 2007 23:12:53 +0100 (CET)
From:	Jiri Kosina <jikos@...os.cz>
To:	Li Yu <raise.sail@...il.com>
cc:	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
	Greg Kroah Hartman <greg@...ah.com>,
	linux-usb-devel <linux-usb-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Vincent Legoll <vincentlegoll@...il.com>,
	"Zephaniah E. Hull" <warp@...allh.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Harold Sargeant <harold-sargeant@...world.com>
Subject: Re: [linux-usb-devel] [DOC] The documentation for HID Simple Driver
 Interface 0.5.0

On Mon, 5 Mar 2007, Li Yu wrote:

>  Under standard HID device driver development means, we need to write 
> one interrupt handler for each new HID device to report event to input 
> subsystem. However, although the most of they can not merge into 
> mainstream kernel tree, they have only some extended keys, e.g. many 
> remote controllers. I think it seem break a fly on the wheel, which 
> write one new interrupt handler for this reason.

This paragraph I don't seem to understand. Either the device is claimed by 
hid-input (*), and then when the device is behaving more-or-less 
correctly, hid-input handles the usages sent in reports and maps them 
properly to input events. New mapping can be quite trivially added to 
hid-input.

If the HID device is not claimed by hid-input, then userspace can access 
the hid events through hiddev and perform any actions that are needed.

Could you please elaborate a little bit more why your approach using 
"simple HID interface" is better than for example hiddev+uinput, done 
completely in userspace?

In addition to that, as I stated in some previous e-mail, I am currently 
working on new 'hidraw' interface, which will provide more flexibility to 
userland applications willing to operate on raw HID data, than they 
currently have with hiddev.

(*) OK, I would tend to agree that the algorithm which decides whether the 
given device will be claimed by hid-input driver could be improved to be 
more HID-specification and HUT compliant. I have this in my TODO, but I 
guess it doesn't matter too much here.

Thanks,

-- 
Jiri Kosina
-
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/