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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 13:24:51 +0000 From: Måns Rullgård <mans@...sr.com> To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> Cc: linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: core: skip interfaces disabled in devicetree Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> writes: > On Sat, Feb 16, 2019 at 05:04:52PM +0000, Mans Rullgard wrote: >> If an interface has an associated devicetree node with status disabled, >> do not register the device. This is useful for boards with a built-in >> multifunction USB device where some functions are broken or otherwise >> undesired. >> >> Signed-off-by: Mans Rullgard <mans@...sr.com> >> --- >> drivers/usb/core/message.c | 4 ++++ >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/usb/core/message.c b/drivers/usb/core/message.c >> index bfa5eda0cc26..6b45d4835e41 100644 >> --- a/drivers/usb/core/message.c >> +++ b/drivers/usb/core/message.c >> @@ -2007,6 +2007,10 @@ int usb_set_configuration(struct usb_device *dev, int configuration) >> for (i = 0; i < nintf; ++i) { >> struct usb_interface *intf = cp->interface[i]; >> >> + if (intf->dev.of_node && >> + !of_device_is_available(intf->dev.of_node)) >> + continue; > > Shouldn't you at least print some message out saying you are skipping > this? Odds are this is going to cause regressions in devices that were > not expecting this, right? So pointing them at why their devices now no > longer work would be good :) They will only be skipped if there is a device tree node for the interface _and_ it has and explicit status = "disabled" property. The default is still to create devices for all interfaces. That said, printing a message is probably a good idea anyway. Would "info" level be appropriate for this? -- Måns Rullgård
Powered by blists - more mailing lists