linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] input: add to hid_ignore

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAO-hwJLo_v5mWaVJHcdf2aaK4yQHfKd8Xk2XTpUa61q_NsTb4g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 24 Jun 2020 10:45:19 +0200
From:   Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>
To:     Marius Zachmann <mail@...iuszachmann.de>
Cc:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>,
        Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>, linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:HID CORE LAYER" <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] input: add to hid_ignore_list

Hi Marius,

On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 10:16 AM Marius Zachmann <mail@...iuszachmann.de> wrote:
>
> Signed-off-by: Marius Zachmann <mail@...iuszachmann.de>

I wasn't Cc-ed on the cover letter (0/3) if any, but there are a few
things to improve here (not code wise, I haven't reviewed the series,
but on the form).

Every commit needs a commit message. And here, this particular commit
just disables 2 device IDs from HID, which, without explanation seems
like you decided to remove support for 2 keyboards from the kernel. So
please add commit messages explaining *why* you are introducing a new
driver/change in the code.

Then, it would be much better to have a single commit that disables
the HID support and add the hwmon driver in one go. Leave the
synchronisation between the trees to the maintainers, and keep it
simple: you can squash your 3 commits together, so it's one semantic
action. This way, if there is a need to bisect or revert this patch,
we won't have side effects and can revert just one patch. Think also
that if someone needs that to be backported in a stable or a
distribution kernel, it would make everyone's life simpler.

That being said, if you squash the 3 patches and provide a good enough
explanation on the series, from a HID point of view, there should not
be any reasons for us to not give an Ack.

Cheers,
Benjamin

> ---
>  drivers/hid/hid-quirks.c | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-quirks.c b/drivers/hid/hid-quirks.c
> index ca8b5c261c7c..7b7bc7737c53 100644
> --- a/drivers/hid/hid-quirks.c
> +++ b/drivers/hid/hid-quirks.c
> @@ -699,6 +699,8 @@ static const struct hid_device_id hid_ignore_list[] = {
>         { HID_USB_DEVICE(USB_VENDOR_ID_AXENTIA, USB_DEVICE_ID_AXENTIA_FM_RADIO) },
>         { HID_USB_DEVICE(USB_VENDOR_ID_BERKSHIRE, USB_DEVICE_ID_BERKSHIRE_PCWD) },
>         { HID_USB_DEVICE(USB_VENDOR_ID_CIDC, 0x0103) },
> +       { HID_USB_DEVICE(USB_VENDOR_ID_CORSAIR, 0x0c10) },
> +       { HID_USB_DEVICE(USB_VENDOR_ID_CORSAIR, 0x1d00) },
>         { HID_USB_DEVICE(USB_VENDOR_ID_CYGNAL, USB_DEVICE_ID_CYGNAL_RADIO_SI470X) },
>         { HID_USB_DEVICE(USB_VENDOR_ID_CYGNAL, USB_DEVICE_ID_CYGNAL_RADIO_SI4713) },
>         { HID_USB_DEVICE(USB_VENDOR_ID_CMEDIA, USB_DEVICE_ID_CM109) },
> --
> 2.27.0
>