linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] USB: serial: option: add support for D-Link DWM-157 C1

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: <20170829082717.GH20634@localhost>
Date:   Tue, 29 Aug 2017 10:27:17 +0200
From:   Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
To:     Bjørn Mork <bjorn@...k.no>
Cc:     Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>,
        "Maciej S. Szmigiero" <mail@...iej.szmigiero.name>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] USB: serial: option: add support for D-Link DWM-157 C1

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 10:08:13AM +0200, Bjørn Mork wrote:
> Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org> writes:
> > On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 04:32:53PM +0200, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote:
> >
> >> Also, three other D-Link modems few lines above are using the same
> >> USB_DEVICE_AND_INTERFACE_INFO() selectors.
> >
> > Yeah, I noticed those, and I'm not sure why they're not using
> > class-matching only either (and note that we have some entries that do).
> 
> I see that I'm responsible for those. They can probably be compressed to
> USB_DEVICE_INTERFACE_CLASS().  I assume I just didn't think about it...

Thanks for confirming.

> FWIW, I found this 'devices' listing for the 2001:7d01 device. I believe
> the 7d02 and 7d03 are similar:
> 
> P:  Vendor=2001 ProdID=7d01 Rev= 3.00
> S:  Manufacturer=D-Link,Inc  
> S:  Product=D-Link DWM-156
> C:* #Ifs= 7 Cfg#= 1 Atr=a0 MxPwr=500mA
> A:  FirstIf#= 0 IfCount= 2 Cls=02(comm.) Sub=0e Prot=00
> I:* If#= 0 Alt= 0 #EPs= 1 Cls=02(comm.) Sub=0e Prot=00 Driver=cdc_mbim
> E:  Ad=88(I) Atr=03(Int.) MxPS=  64 Ivl=125us
> I:  If#= 1 Alt= 0 #EPs= 0 Cls=0a(data ) Sub=00 Prot=02 Driver=cdc_mbim
> I:* If#= 1 Alt= 1 #EPs= 2 Cls=0a(data ) Sub=00 Prot=02 Driver=cdc_mbim
> E:  Ad=81(I) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS= 512 Ivl=0ms
> E:  Ad=01(O) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS= 512 Ivl=0ms
> I:* If#= 2 Alt= 0 #EPs= 3 Cls=ff(vend.) Sub=02 Prot=01 Driver=option
> E:  Ad=87(I) Atr=03(Int.) MxPS=  64 Ivl=500us
> E:  Ad=82(I) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS= 512 Ivl=0ms
> E:  Ad=02(O) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS= 512 Ivl=0ms
> I:* If#= 3 Alt= 0 #EPs= 2 Cls=ff(vend.) Sub=00 Prot=00 Driver=option
> E:  Ad=83(I) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS= 512 Ivl=0ms
> E:  Ad=03(O) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS= 512 Ivl=0ms
> I:* If#= 4 Alt= 0 #EPs= 2 Cls=ff(vend.) Sub=00 Prot=00 Driver=option
> E:  Ad=84(I) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS= 512 Ivl=0ms
> E:  Ad=04(O) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS= 512 Ivl=0ms
> I:* If#= 5 Alt= 0 #EPs= 2 Cls=ff(vend.) Sub=00 Prot=00 Driver=option
> E:  Ad=85(I) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS= 512 Ivl=0ms
> E:  Ad=05(O) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS= 512 Ivl=0ms
> I:* If#= 6 Alt= 0 #EPs= 2 Cls=08(stor.) Sub=06 Prot=50 Driver=usb-storage
> E:  Ad=86(I) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS= 512 Ivl=0ms
> E:  Ad=06(O) Atr=02(Bulk) MxPS= 512 Ivl=0ms

I guess we could use USB_DEVICE_INTERFACE_CLASS() for these three as
well then, if only to avoid having others reproducing this pattern.

Judging from the commit message of a2a2d6c7f93e ("USB: option: add a
D-Link DWM-156 variant") it seems we're not even sure anyone is using
0x7d02 and 0x7d03 so the risk of breaking something (by introducing new
dummy ports) should be low.

Do you want to submit a patch or should I do it?

Thanks,
Johan