linux-kernel - Re: Re: (3) [PATCH v2] input: add 2 kind of switch

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]

Date:   Fri, 30 Oct 2020 13:19:15 +0100
From:   "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Jungrae Kim <jryu.kim@...sung.com>
Cc:     HyungJae Im <hj2.im@...sung.com>,
        "manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org" <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-input@...r.kernel.org" <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
        "rydberg@...math.org" <rydberg@...math.org>
Subject: Re: Re: (3) [PATCH v2] input: add 2 kind of switch

On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 08:59:18PM +0900, Jungrae Kim wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 08:28:12PM +0900, Jungrae Kim wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 01:39:16PM +0900, HyungJae Im wrote:
> > > > > Hello, This is Hyungjae Im from Samsung Electronics.
> > > > > Let me answer your questions inline.
> > > > > 
> > > > > >On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 10:27:47PM +0900, HyungJae Im wrote:
> > > > > >> From: "hj2.im" <hj2.im@...sung.com>
> > > > > >> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 22:11:24 +0900
> > > > > >> Subject: [PATCH v2] input: add 2 kind of switch
> > > > > > 
> > > > > >Why is this in the body of that patch?
> > > > > 
> > > > > I read "how to send your first kernel patch", but still making so many mistakes.
> > > > > I will be cautious with this.
> > > > >  
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> We need support to various accessories on the device,
> > > > > >> some switch does not exist in switch list.
> > > > > >> So added switch for the following purpose.
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> SW_COVER_ATTACHED is for the checking the cover
> > > > > >> attached or not on the device. SW_EXT_PEN_ATTACHED is for the
> > > > > >> checking the external pen attached or not on the device
> > > > > > 
> > > > > >You didn't answer the previous question as to why the existing values do
> > > > > >not work for you instead of having to create new ones?
> > > > > 
> > > > >  I think I should clarify this part the most for this review.
> > > > >  As you know, new added events both has similar existing events,
> > > > >  but it has to operate separately.
> > > > > 
> > > > >  First, SW_COVER_ATTACHED is similar with SW_MACHINE_COVER.
> > > > >  We need two events for our cover interaction.
> > > > >  One is to detect if flip cover is open/closed(covers screen or not),
> > > > >  and one is for detecting if cover is attached(detect if device is put into cover).
> > > > >  With the second event, we send event for attachment and start authentication
> > > > >  distinguishing if it was Samsung made cover.
> > > > > 
> > > > >  Second, SW_EXT_PEN_ATTACHED detects if pen is attached externally on tablet models.
> > > > >  It is different with SW_PEN_INSERTED since this is detecting pens like our NOTE series.
> > > > >  SW_EXT_PEN_ATTACHED has an unique role to set wacom tuning table differently
> > > > >  while pen is attached/detached.
> > > >  
> > > > All of that needs to go in the changelog text for the individual patches
> > > > when you submit them.
> > > >  
> > > > But as Dmitry pointed out, it doesn't look like either of these drivers
> > > > are needed at all, just use the gpio-keys driver instead.
> > > >  
> > > > thanks,
> > > >  
> > > > greg k-h
> > >  
> > > Can you accept V1 patch? or need to add a change of device tree?
> > 
> > What is "v1" patch?  Do you have a pointer to it on lore.kernel.org?
> > 
> > > Please let me know what do I do now. 
> > 
> > What is wrong with just using a device tree entry for the gpio-keys
> > driver instead?
> > 
> > thanks,
> > 
> > greg k-h
> 
> V1 Patch : https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20201021031216epcms1p556d8d7d5d763ec47f67cd8cbe3972935@epcms1p5/

As I said there, that patch is not acceptable for style reasons alone,
nothing we can do with that unless it is fixed, right?

> I think do not need modify gpio_keys. And I`m not sure device tree need to added to patch.

No, you don't need to modify it, just use it.

So what exactly is the issue anymore?  Just use the gpio-keys driver and
all should be fine, right?

thanks,

greg k-h