[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200204100332.GC1088789@kroah.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2020 10:03:32 +0000
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
Vladis Dronov <vdronov@...hat.com>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.4 65/90] Input: aiptek - use descriptors of current
altsetting
On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 09:11:55AM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 03, 2020 at 04:20:08PM +0000, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > From: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
> >
> > [ Upstream commit cfa4f6a99fb183742cace65ec551b444852b8ef6 ]
> >
> > Make sure to always use the descriptors of the current alternate setting
> > to avoid future issues when accessing fields that may differ between
> > settings.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
> > Acked-by: Vladis Dronov <vdronov@...hat.com>
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191210113737.4016-4-johan@kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
> > ---
> > drivers/input/tablet/aiptek.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/input/tablet/aiptek.c b/drivers/input/tablet/aiptek.c
> > index 06d0ffef4a171..e08b0ef078e81 100644
> > --- a/drivers/input/tablet/aiptek.c
> > +++ b/drivers/input/tablet/aiptek.c
> > @@ -1713,7 +1713,7 @@ aiptek_probe(struct usb_interface *intf, const struct usb_device_id *id)
> >
> > aiptek->inputdev = inputdev;
> > aiptek->intf = intf;
> > - aiptek->ifnum = intf->altsetting[0].desc.bInterfaceNumber;
> > + aiptek->ifnum = intf->cur_altsetting->desc.bInterfaceNumber;
> > aiptek->inDelay = 0;
> > aiptek->endDelay = 0;
> > aiptek->previousJitterable = 0;
>
> I asked Sasha to drop this one directly when he added it, so it's
> probable gone from all the stable queues by now.
Oops, no, let me go drop it.
> But I'm still curious how this ended up being selected for stable in the
> first place? There's no fixes or stable tag in the commit, and I never
> received a mail from the AUTOSEL scripts.
I don't know, there was a bunch of last-minute patches picked up for
this round based on some "fixes needed due to other fixes".
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists