On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 07:11:04PM +0530, Anshul Garg wrote:
> Hi Mr. Dmitry
> ,
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 1:05 AM, Dmitry Torokhov
> <dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hi Anshul,
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 10:57:13AM -0700, Anshul Garg wrote:
> >> Added check for poll_interval range in input_register_polled_device
> >> function similar to input_polldev_set_poll function.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Anshul Garg <aksgarg1989@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/input/input-polldev.c | 6 ++++++
> >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/input/input-polldev.c b/drivers/input/input-polldev.c
> >> index 3664f81..0e88a9e 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/input/input-polldev.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/input/input-polldev.c
> >> @@ -309,6 +309,12 @@ int input_register_polled_device(struct input_polled_dev *dev)
> >>
> >> input_set_drvdata(input, dev);
> >> INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&dev->work, input_polled_device_work);
> >> +
> >> + if (dev->poll_interval > dev->poll_interval_max ||
> >> + dev->poll_interval < dev->poll_interval_min) {
> >> + pr_err("Poll interval Range incorrect\n");
> >> + return -EINVAL;
> >> + }
> >
> > What driver was this change tested with?
> I have not checked this change for any driver.
>
Yes, I know that you did not test it because if you would have tested it
you would have noticed that it breaks existing devices, since hardly
any of them set dev->poll_interval_max and instead rely on the polldev
code to apply reasonable defaults.
There have been a few patches that had errors that would have been
easily caught if you tested the changes. Please next time you submit a
patch mention how you tested it to make sure it works as intended.
Thanks.
--
Dmitry
--
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
