lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Feb]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: uhid: broken interface: 32/64-bit compatibility
Date
Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 03:51:41PM +0200, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > Johan Hedberg wrote:
> > > Hi David,
> > >
> > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2013, David Herrmann wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov
> > > > <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > > > Hi David and all,
> > > > >
> > > > > There's claim in uhid.h that the interface is "compatible even between
> > > > > architectures". But it obviously is not true: struct uhid_create_req
> > > > > contains pointer which breaks everything.
> > > > >
> > > > > The easy way to demonstrate the issue is compile uhid-example.c with -m32
> > > > > and try to run it on 64 bit kernel. Creating of the device will fail.
> > > >
> > > > Indeed, we missed that. We should probably also notify the HIDP
> > > > developers as "struct hidp_connadd_req" suffers from the same
> > > > problems. (CC'ed)
> > > >
> > > > > I don't see an easy way to fix this. Few options:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. Replace the pointer with u64. It will fix the issue, but it breaks ABI
> > > > > which is never a good idea. Not sure how many users interface already
> > > > > has.
> > > >
> > > > The only users I am aware of is an HID debugging tool and experimental
> > > > HoG Bluetooth support (bluez). Maybe Marcel or Johan can comment
> > > > whether this is already used by bluez-5? If it is, then we shouldn't
> > > > break ABI and go with #2+#3. Otherwise, I think changing to u64 should
> > > > be ok.
> > > > On the other hand, it would break any future build for older stable
> > > > kernels so not breaking ABI is probably the best idea. Any comments? I
> > > > can add a COMPAT fix and a comment to fix this in the next version of
> > > > UHID_CREATE.
> > >
> > > The HoG code in BlueZ 5 does indeed use this API and it's also not
> > > anymore behind any kind of experimental flag (i.e. it is an officially
> > > supported feature).
> > >
> > > Johan
> >
> > Here's my attempt to fix the issue.
> >
> > Not sure if tricks with padding in a good idea. We can just use __u64
> > instead of pointer, but it will require update of userspace to silence
> > cast warning and will cause warning if you will try to use updated
> > userspace with old kernel headers.
> >
> > Any comments?
>
> This does not fix anything really, we simply have to deal with compat
> interface.
>
> Compiled but not tested.

Works for me.

Acked-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>

Comment in uhid.h about cross-arch compatibility should be
removed since it's false.

--
Kirill A. Shutemov


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-02-18 12:01    [W:0.069 / U:0.156 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site