linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/input_helper: Add new input-handling helper

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]

Message-ID: <YZVqbZpAPHOBG6bL@google.com>
Date:   Wed, 17 Nov 2021 12:47:41 -0800
From:   Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To:     Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
Cc:     Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
        Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
        Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
        Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda@...el.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org,
        "Kristian H . Kristensen" <hoegsberg@...gle.com>,
        Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>,
        Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/input_helper: Add new input-handling helper

On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 10:38:58AM -0800, Brian Norris wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 4:52 PM Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org> wrote:
> 
> (Snip other comments; they seem reasonable, and I'll factor them into
> the next version)
> 
> > I guess one random thought I had is whether there would be an
> > appropriate place to put this that _wasn't_ in DRM. I still wonder
> > whether we'll ever try to upstream something like the cpufreq boost
> > driver that we're carrying around and using in Chrome OS. If so, it
> > would want to use these same helpers and it'd be pretty awkward for it
> > to have to reach into DRM. ...any chance we could just land these
> > helpers somewhere more generic?
> 
> Yeah, I was torn on what to do here as well. I'd rather land something
> than nothing, and when reading past conversations, it sounded like
> Dmitry didn't want this kind of thing in drivers/input/ [1]. I'd love
> to be wrong here though.

I simply feel that input_handler is already a very simple abstraction
and trying to specialize it to simplify users further is not productive.

> 
> I'm not sure where else this would belong though -- either in the
> producing subsystem (input) or the consuming one(s) (drm, cpufreq). We
> could make up some odd middle ground I suppose (lib/?), but that seems
> pretty artificial.
> 
> I guess one question is, what is this abstracting, and is that
> abstraction actually a shared need for multiple subsystems? I think
> the abstraction is, "impending user activity; <component X> should
> prepare itself". That general need is exactly the same for the cases
> I'm aware of. And if there is any tuning needed (e.g., ignore input
> device Y; or turn the whole thing off, because we're ignoring input
> for now), that would also seem to be a shared need.
> 
> Anyway, back to my first paragraph: I'll plan on keeping this as-is
> (as a DRM helper) unless I hear otherwise from input folks.
> 
> Brian
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20180416174117.GA77055@dtor-ws/

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry