linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: peaq-wmi: Add DMI check before binding to the WMI interface

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 5 Oct 2017 20:04:19 +0200
From:   Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc:     Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy@...radead.org>,
        Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: peaq-wmi: Add DMI check before binding to
 the WMI interface

Hi,

On 05-10-17 19:59, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 5:27 PM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 05-10-17 16:23, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> It seems that the WMI GUID used by the PEAQ 2-in-1 WMI hotkeys is not
>>>> as unique as a GUID should be and is used on some other devices too.
>>>>
>>>> This is causing spurious key-press reports on these other devices.
>>>>
>>>> This commits adds a DMI check to the PEAQ 2-in-1 WMI hotkeys driver to
>>>> ensure that it is actually running on a PEAQ 2-in-1, fixing the
>>>> spurious key-presses on these other devices.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Recently I have pushed similar patch (another device). Can you rebase
>>> against testing?
>>
>>
>> That patch adds a blacklist, for yet another model then the 2 bugreports:
>>
>>>> BugLink: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1497861
>>>> BugLink: https://bugzilla.suse.com/attachment.cgi?id=743182
>>
>>
>> which I've received. My patch adds a whitelist instead as it seems the GUID
>> used is some very generic GUID,
> 
> Since you are maintainer and moreover have a hardware to test I assume
> that's correct thing to do...
> 
>> so the blacklist patch should simply be
>> dropped,
> 
> ... however, the patch can't be dropped.
> 
> Either me, or you in v2 need to revert it. Tell me what you prefer here.

Isn't the whole purpose of having a testing branch that patches can
actually be dropped. AFAIK this has not even hit -next yet, so IMHO
it should just be dropped ?

If it really should be reverted instead I'll leave doing a revert up
to you.

> In any case, please (re)send with Cc to Kai so he or bug reportes may
> have a chance to test it as well.

Ok, done.

Regards,

Hans