| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20151109231351.GD9155@dtor-ws>
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 15:13:51 -0800
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To: Andrew Duggan <aduggan@...aptics.com>
Cc: linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...il.com>,
Christopher Heiny <cheiny@...aptics.com>,
Stephen Chandler Paul <cpaul@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/26] Input: synaptics-rmi4 - add a common input device
in rmi_driver
On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 03:36:56PM -0800, Andrew Duggan wrote:
> From: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>
>
> When .unified_input is set to true in the platform data, the
> functions should rely on the common input node created by rmi_driver
> to forward events instead of having their own input node.
>
> This node is named "Synaptics PRODUCT_ID" to be able to
> differentiate the various models.
>
> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>
> Tested-by: Andrew Duggan <aduggan@...aptics.com>
> ---
> drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.h | 6 ++++++
> drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f01.c | 7 +++++++
> include/linux/rmi.h | 2 ++
> 4 files changed, 58 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.c b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.c
> index b9db709..95f9386 100644
> --- a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.c
> +++ b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.c
> @@ -310,6 +310,9 @@ static int process_interrupt_requests(struct rmi_device *rmi_dev)
> if (entry->irq_mask)
> process_one_interrupt(data, entry);
>
> + if (data->input)
> + input_sync(data->input);
> +
> return 0;
> }
>
> @@ -330,6 +333,25 @@ static int rmi_driver_set_input_params(struct rmi_device *rmi_dev,
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static void rmi_driver_set_input_name(struct rmi_device *rmi_dev,
> + struct input_dev *input)
> +{
> + struct rmi_driver_data *data = dev_get_drvdata(&rmi_dev->dev);
> + char *device_name = rmi_f01_get_product_ID(data->f01_container);
> + char *name;
> +
> + if (!device_name)
> + return;
Should we still give device some name?
> +
> + name = devm_kasprintf(&rmi_dev->dev, GFP_KERNEL,
> + "Synaptics %s", device_name);
> + if (!name)
> + return;
Are we guaranteed that devm_kasprintf only called in probe() path?
What about errors?
> +
> + input->name = name;
> +}
> +
> +
> static int rmi_driver_set_irq_bits(struct rmi_device *rmi_dev,
> unsigned long *mask)
> {
> @@ -720,6 +742,8 @@ static int rmi_driver_remove(struct device *dev)
> const struct rmi_device_platform_data *pdata =
> rmi_get_platform_data(rmi_dev);
>
> + if (data->input)
> + input_unregister_device(data->input);
Isn't this too early? Can sensor still be sending data here? (Looking...
yeah, it looks like it can. Bad.)
> disable_sensor(rmi_dev);
> rmi_free_function_list(rmi_dev);
>
> @@ -832,6 +856,15 @@ static int rmi_driver_probe(struct device *dev)
> data->current_irq_mask = irq_memory + size * 2;
> data->new_irq_mask = irq_memory + size * 3;
>
> + if (pdata->unified_input) {
> + data->input = input_allocate_device();
> + if (data->input) {
> + rmi_driver_set_input_params(rmi_dev, data->input);
> + sprintf(data->input_phys, "%s/input0", dev_name(dev));
> + data->input->phys = data->input_phys;
> + }
Bail if error?
> + }
> +
> irq_count = 0;
> dev_dbg(dev, "Creating functions.");
> retval = rmi_scan_pdt(rmi_dev, &irq_count, rmi_create_function);
> @@ -866,6 +899,15 @@ static int rmi_driver_probe(struct device *dev)
> mutex_init(&data->suspend_mutex);
> }
>
> + if (data->input) {
> + rmi_driver_set_input_name(rmi_dev, data->input);
> + if (input_register_device(data->input)) {
> + dev_err(dev, "%s: Failed to register input device.\n",
> + __func__);
> + goto err_destroy_functions;
> + }
> + }
> +
> if (gpio_is_valid(pdata->attn_gpio)) {
> static const char GPIO_LABEL[] = "attn";
> unsigned long gpio_flags = GPIOF_DIR_IN;
> @@ -921,6 +963,7 @@ static int rmi_driver_probe(struct device *dev)
> return 0;
>
> err_destroy_functions:
> + input_free_device(data->input);
> rmi_free_function_list(rmi_dev);
> kfree(irq_memory);
> err_free_mem:
> diff --git a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.h b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.h
> index dda564f..36ca34b 100644
> --- a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.h
> +++ b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.h
> @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
> #include <linux/ctype.h>
> #include <linux/hrtimer.h>
> #include <linux/ktime.h>
> +#include <linux/input.h>
> #include "rmi_bus.h"
>
> #define RMI_DRIVER_VERSION "1.6"
> @@ -29,6 +30,8 @@
>
> #define RMI_PDT_PROPS_HAS_BSR 0x02
>
> +#define NAME_BUFFER_SIZE 256
> +
> struct rmi_driver_data {
> struct list_head function_list;
>
> @@ -49,6 +52,8 @@ struct rmi_driver_data {
> unsigned long *current_irq_mask;
> unsigned long *new_irq_mask;
> struct mutex irq_mutex;
> + struct input_dev *input;
> + char input_phys[NAME_BUFFER_SIZE];
>
> /* Following are used when polling. */
> struct hrtimer poll_timer;
> @@ -112,6 +117,7 @@ void rmi_unregister_physical_driver(void);
>
> int rmi_register_f01_handler(void);
> void rmi_unregister_f01_handler(void);
> +char *rmi_f01_get_product_ID(struct rmi_function *fn);
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_RMI4_F11
> int rmi_register_f11_handler(void);
> diff --git a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f01.c b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f01.c
> index ee5f4a1..2d72dc8 100644
> --- a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f01.c
> +++ b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f01.c
> @@ -176,6 +176,13 @@ static int rmi_f01_read_properties(struct rmi_device *rmi_dev,
> return 0;
> }
>
> +char *rmi_f01_get_product_ID(struct rmi_function *fn)
> +{
> + struct f01_data *f01 = dev_get_drvdata(&fn->dev);
> +
> + return f01->properties.product_id;
> +}
Should we have something like rmi_to_input_id() that is similar to
usb_to_input_id()?
> +
> static int rmi_f01_probe(struct rmi_function *fn)
> {
> struct rmi_device *rmi_dev = fn->rmi_dev;
> diff --git a/include/linux/rmi.h b/include/linux/rmi.h
> index ca35b2f..1d22985 100644
> --- a/include/linux/rmi.h
> +++ b/include/linux/rmi.h
> @@ -277,6 +277,8 @@ struct rmi_device_platform_data {
> struct rmi_f30_gpioled_map *gpioled_map;
> struct rmi_button_map *f41_button_map;
>
> + bool unified_input;
> +
> #ifdef CONFIG_RMI4_FWLIB
> char *firmware_name;
> #endif
> --
> 2.1.4
>
Thanks.
--
Dmitry
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists