| 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: <CAN+gG=Guce5kQ+vkipmRRR9VWx_eZR=NmZPigWRs9xoehBjAGg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 10:23:23 +0100
From: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...il.com>
To: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Cc: Andrew Duggan <aduggan@...aptics.com>,
linux-input <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
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 Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 12:13 AM, Dmitry Torokhov
<dmitry.torokhov@...il.com> wrote:
> 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?
Actually, I think the test is need needed. rmi_f01_get_product_ID()
returns a pointer to an array embedded in struct f01_data.
rmi_driver_set_input_name() is called after f01 has been initialized
and I think if there is an error while processing f01 we bail out. So
basically device_name can not be null. (If I read the code correctly).
>
>> +
>> + 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?
Right now, yes. This function is called only in probe.
> What about errors?
>
Indeed, I should have tackled these first :(
>> +
>> + 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.)
oops, my 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?
yes, we need to change it
>
>> + }
>> +
>> 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()?
Works for me.
>
>> +
>> 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.
>
Thanks for the review!
Cheers,
Benjamin
--
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