linux-kernel - Re: [v2] HID: corsair-void: Add Corsair Void headset family driver

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: <78b667fa-8e54-4023-9187-4ecb999d3c01@wanadoo.fr>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2024 11:52:24 +0200
From: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>,
 Stuart Hayhurst <stuart.a.hayhurst@...il.com>, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
 kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 Benjamin Tissoires <bentiss@...nel.org>, Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [v2] HID: corsair-void: Add Corsair Void headset family driver

Le 21/08/2024 à 09:26, Markus Elfring a écrit :
>>> This was the case for a while.
>>>
>>> Increasing applications of scope-based resource management provide
>>> further opportunities for smaller scopes according to some local variables,
>>> don't they?
>>
>> Personally I'd rather it just fits in with the rest of the kernel,
>> but if the general consensus is that new drivers should use tighter
>> scopes, I can do that instead.
> 
> There are the usual communication challenges to consider also especially
> with collateral evolution in such software areas.
> 
> 
>>> How do you think about to collaborate with other data structures
>>> than character arrays?
>>>
>>> See also:
>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst?h=v6.11-rc4#n953
>>
>> Hm, I picked a character array since all it's doing is sending a
>> buffer to the device.
>> There's no published specification to follow, only "Well the Windows
>> driver sends these bytes and this happens".
>> So there isn't really a structure that really comes naturally,
>> especially with all the magic numbers.
> 
> I imagine that further development concerns can be adjusted accordingly.
> 
> 
>> Unless you're suggesting I just do `unsigned char send_buf[3] = {...}`?
> 

Hi,

If I recollect correctly, there may be an alignment issue and just using 
the stack is not enough to guaranty what is needed.


CJ


> Such a programming approach might also look promising.
>