[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y8gMEn+wivZRhIsd@google.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2023 15:11:14 +0000
From: Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>
To: Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>
Cc: benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com, avid.rheinsberg@...il.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-input@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] HID: core: Provide new max_buffer_size attribute to
over-ride the default
On Wed, 18 Jan 2023, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jan 2023, Lee Jones wrote:
>
> > > > Presently, when a report is processed, its size is compared solely
> > > > against the value specified by user-space.
> > >
> > > While I am generally fine with the idea, I don't understand this sentence.
> > > What exactly do you mean by 'specified by user-space'? It's defined as a
> > > compile-time constant.
> > >
> > > > If the received report ends up being smaller than this, the
> > > > remainder of the buffer is zeroed.
> >
> > Apologies for any ambiguity.
> >
> > "its size" == "compile-time constant"
> >
> > Would "its maximum size" read better?
>
> I think that the confusion comes from the fact that the changelog is
> written solely with the UHID usercase on mind ... ? (which is dealt with
> in the independent followup patch).
Quite possibly, yes. Since this is the way the bug was reported to me
and how I presently view it. However, I suppose reports do not always
originate from user-space. Good point.
How would you like me to move forward? Would you like me to re-write
the commit log to be more generic?
--
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Powered by blists - more mailing lists