linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] HID: logitech-hidpp: Add Bluetooth Mouse M336/M337/M535 to unhandled_hidpp

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: <CAJZ5v0iwEKtLVzzJw+XG5-w=qr86ec0yKpAWCU-KLwYmFnt5Zg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 7 Dec 2022 14:00:28 +0100
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:     Bastien Nocera <hadess@...ess.net>
Cc:     Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
        Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Filipe Laíns <lains@...eup.net>,
        linux-input@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@...mhuis.info>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] HID: logitech-hidpp: Add Bluetooth Mouse
 M336/M337/M535 to unhandled_hidpp_devices[]

On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 1:43 PM Bastien Nocera <hadess@...ess.net> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2022-12-07 at 11:19 +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> > On Wed, 7 Dec 2022, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
> >
> > > Agree, but OTOH, Rafael, your mouse is not brand new AFAICT, so I
> > > am
> > > worried that you won't be the only one complaining we just killed
> > > their
> > > mouse. So I think the even wiser solution would be to delay (and so
> > > revert in 6.1 or 6.2) the 2 patches that enable hid++ on all
> > > logitech
> > > mice (8544c812e43ab7bdf40458411b83987b8cba924d and
> > > 532223c8ac57605a10e46dc0ab23dcf01c9acb43).
> >
> > If we were not at -rc8 timeframe, I'd be in favor to coming up with
> > proper
> > fix still for 6.1. But as things currently are, let's just revert
> > those
> > and reschedule them with proper fix for 6.2+.
>
> Has anyone seen any other reports?
>
> Because, honestly, seeing work that adds support for dozens of devices
> getting tossed out at the last minute based on a single report with no
> opportunity to fix the problem is really frustrating.

Well, that's why I sent patches to address this particular case
without possibly breaking anything else.

Improvements can be made on top of them and the blocklist entry added
by patch [2/2] need not stay there forever, FWIW.