linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 2/4] Input: touch-overlay

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4a16a651-62d6-4fba-8e18-1da029c52768@wolfvision.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2024 10:52:20 +0100
From: Javier Carrasco <javier.carrasco@...fvision.net>
To: Jeff LaBundy <jeff@...undy.com>
Cc: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
 Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Henrik Rydberg <rydberg@...math.org>,
 Bastian Hecht <hechtb@...il.com>,
 Michael Riesch <michael.riesch@...fvision.net>,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/4] Input: touch-overlay - Add touchscreen overlay
 handling

On 11.01.24 14:55, Jeff LaBundy wrote:
> Hi Javier,
> 
> I agree with you. Thinking about this more, immediately introducing this
> feature to the core is a relatively high risk that would be shared by all
> users. I like your idea of introducing a preliminary version first before
> making heavy-handed changes. That's the beauty of helper functions; they
> only impact users who explicitly opt in.
> 
> I don't have an immediate use case, but I've been looking at this from
> the perspective of a future customer of it. Maybe the right path forward
> is as follows:
> 
> 1. Stick with the same general architecture of v6 and its "limitations",
>    which in practice are unlikely to be encountered. I imagine the overlay
>    layout you have been using would be the most common use case.
> 2. Make the handful of small changes that have been suggested thus far.
> 3. Consider updating patch [4/4] to combine the touchscreen and buttons
>    into the same input device as you had in v1. This sets a little simpler
>    precedent for the first user of these helpers. If later these helpers
>    do get absorbed into the core, thereby forcing a single input device,
>    the st1232 would continue to appear the same to user space.
> 
> Does this seem reasonable?
> 

It seems reasonable, so I will go for that approach in v7: single input
device and less modifications in the consumer drivers.

Best regards,
Javier Carrasco