linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] input: don't call input_dev_release

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: <20130705074632.GF11422@caracas.corpusers.net>
Date:	Fri, 5 Jul 2013 09:46:32 +0200
From:	Oskar Andero <oskar.andero@...ymobile.com>
To:	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
CC:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-input@...r.kernel.org" <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Makarov, Aleksej" <Aleksej.Makarov@...ymobile.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] input: don't call input_dev_release_keys() in resume

Hi Dmitry,

On 18:33 Thu 04 Apr     , Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> Hi Oskar,
> 
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 03:01:22PM +0100, oskar.andero@...ymobile.com wrote:
> > From: Aleksej Makarov <aleksej.makarov@...ymobile.com>
> >
> > When waking up the platform by pressing a specific key, sending a
> > release on that key makes it impossible to react on the event in
> > user-space.
> >
> 
> No, we can not simply not release keys after resume from suspend, as
> this leads to keys being stuck. Consider you are holding an 'I' key on
> your external USB keyboard and close your laptop's lid. Then you release
> the key and leave. Later you come back, open the lid waking the laptop
> and observe endless stream of 'I' in your open terminal.
> 
> Maybe we should release the keys during suspend time? I am not sure how
> Android infrastructure will react to this though...

I finally got the time to try this out. Releasing the keys in suspend
also solves our problem. Would such patch work for the USB keyboard
case you described? Theoretically, I think it should, right?

So, basically:

static int input_dev_suspend(struct device *dev)
 {
        struct input_dev *input_dev = to_input_dev(dev);
 
-       mutex_lock(&input_dev->mutex);
-
-       if (input_dev->users)
-               input_dev_toggle(input_dev, false);
-
-       mutex_unlock(&input_dev->mutex);
+       input_reset_device(input_dev);
 
        return 0;
 }
 
 static int input_dev_resume(struct device *dev)
 {
-       struct input_dev *input_dev = to_input_dev(dev);
-
-       input_reset_device(input_dev);
-
        return 0;
 }

Should I send the patch?

-Oskar
--
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/