On Wed, 27 Aug 2014, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> > Is it worth adding report->id to this hid_warn()?
> >
> > A valid device is not expected to ever send >64 bytes reports but in
> > case a firmware update would do so it would help to know for which
> > report it was.
>
> It definitely wouldn't hurt. Pull request with the original patch is now
> on its way to Linus though, so let's do this as a followup patch on top
> once this is merged.
I've just queued the below for 3.18.
From: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@xxxxxxx>
Subject: [PATCH] HID: picolcd: be more verbose when reporting report size error
picolcd device is not expected to send any report with size larger than 64
bytes.
If this impossible event happens (sic!), print also a report ID to allow
for easier debugging.
Suggested-by: Bruno Prémont <bonbons@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@xxxxxxx>
---
drivers/hid/hid-picolcd_core.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-picolcd_core.c b/drivers/hid/hid-picolcd_core.c
index 020df3c..c1b29a9 100644
--- a/drivers/hid/hid-picolcd_core.c
+++ b/drivers/hid/hid-picolcd_core.c
@@ -351,8 +351,8 @@ static int picolcd_raw_event(struct hid_device *hdev,
return 1;
if (size > 64) {
- hid_warn(hdev, "invalid size value (%d) for picolcd raw event\n",
- size);
+ hid_warn(hdev, "invalid size value (%d) for picolcd raw event (%d)\n",
+ size, report->id);
return 0;
}
--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
--
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
