linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] USB: gadget: Fix the function name error in sourcesink/loopback.

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: <2023080108-resilient-citation-9a34@gregkh>
Date:   Tue, 1 Aug 2023 08:22:49 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     周城东 <zhouscd@...il.com>
Cc:     dan.scally@...asonboard.com, laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com,
        m.grzeschik@...gutronix.de, john@...ping.me.uk,
        linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] USB: gadget: Fix the function name error in
 sourcesink/loopback.

On Tue, Aug 01, 2023 at 02:15:50PM +0800, 周城东 wrote:
> Hi,  Greg KH
> 
> > I do not understand this text at all, sorry.
> > What exactly is broken and what is changed here to resolve the issue?
> 
> The reason for the problem is that the value of struct
> usb_function.name is "loopback", while struct usb_function_driver.name
> is "Loopback". The same issue exists for sourcesink. When using USB
> Config FS, it won't be possible to enable these two functions.

Please document this in the changelog text.

> > And please use your full name for patches.
> 
> I'm sorry, this is my first time sending kernel patch. How should I
> modify my name for the patch that has already been sent? Or should I
> resend a new patch?

Yes, you need to send a new version, please read the section entitled
"The canonical patch format" in the kernel file,
Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst for what needs to be done
here.

> > You just changed a user-visable api, right?  Where did you document this
> >  and what will it affect?
> 
> Yes, I removed lb_modexit and lb_modinit and used a simpler method for
> function initialization. This does not affect any other
> functionalities. In the old way, the loopback function was called by
> sslb_modinit in sourcesink. I believe this is not a good approach as
> the loopback and sourcesink should be independent functionalities.
> Their purpose is to provide simple examples for USB beginners like myself.

But you changed the name:

> > > -     ss->function.name = "source/sink";
> > > +     ss->function.name = "sourcesink";

isn't that visable to userspace?

thanks,

greg k-h