On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 10:05 PM, Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 06:49:36PM +0200, Anssi Hannula wrote: >> (added Dmitry to CC) >> >> 19.02.2014 13:42, Elias Vanderstuyft kirjoitti: >> > Hi, >> > >> >> Hi, >> >> > In the process of reviewing the Wine DInput translation layer, I >> > noticed an inconvenience (in the ff-core implementation?) that can >> > possibly lead to confusing problems to application developers (not >> > only for Wine), in short: >> > If a new (id==-1) effect was uploaded (look at >> > ff-core.c::input_ff_upload(...)) that failed (e.g. returning EINVAL), >> > ff-core will have assigned a positive number to the effect id. This >> > can be confusing because the dev->ff->effects[] array will not contain >> > an element at the index of that new effect id. >> >> I agree that this is a bit confusing, and the kernel code should >> probably be modified to not clobber the ioctl-provided effect on failure >> (effect->id is set to an "undefined" value, i.e. next free effect slot). >> >> Dmitry, WDYT? > > Yeah, it looks like we need to change evdev.c to read: > > error = input_ff_upload(dev, &effect, file); > if (error) > return error; > > if (put_user(effect.id, &(((struct ff_effect __user *)p)->id))) > return -EFAULT; > > return 0; Alright, who will create the patch? Do I may / have to do it? > > Unfortunately applications should still expect changed effect ID for > quite some time. > > Thanks. > > -- > Dmitry Best regards, Elias -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
