On Oct 03 2016 or thereabouts, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> The hid-led driver works fine under 4.8.0, however with the next
> kernel from today I get this:
>
> ------------[ cut here ]------------
> WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 2578 at drivers/usb/core/hcd.c:1584 usb_hcd_map_urb_for_dma+0x373/0x550 [usbcore]
> transfer buffer not dma capable
> Modules linked in: hid_led(+) usbhid vfat fat ir_sony_decoder iwlmvm led_class mac80211 snd_hda_codec_realtek snd_hda_codec_generic x86_pkg_temp_thermal iwlwifi crc32c_intel snd_hda_codec_hdmi i2c_i801 i2c_smbus snd_hda_intel cfg80211 snd_hda_codec snd_hda_core snd_pcm r8169 snd_timer mei_me mii snd mei ir_lirc_codec lirc_dev nuvoton_cir rc_core btusb btintel bluetooth rfkill usb_storage efivarfs ipv6 ehci_pci ehci_hcd xhci_pci xhci_hcd usbcore usb_common ext4 jbd2 mbcache ahci libahci libata
> CPU: 0 PID: 2578 Comm: systemd-udevd Not tainted 4.8.0-rc8-next-20161003 #1
> Hardware name: ZOTAC ZBOX-CI321NANO/ZBOX-CI321NANO, BIOS B246P105 06/01/2015
> ffffc90003dbb7e0 ffffffff81280425 ffffc90003dbb830 0000000000000000
> ffffc90003dbb820 ffffffff8105b086 0000063003dbb800 ffff88006f374480
> 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000001 ffff880079544000
> Call Trace:
> [<ffffffff81280425>] dump_stack+0x68/0x93
> [<ffffffff8105b086>] __warn+0xc6/0xe0
> [<ffffffff8105b0ea>] warn_slowpath_fmt+0x4a/0x50
> [<ffffffffa0143a43>] usb_hcd_map_urb_for_dma+0x373/0x550 [usbcore]
> [<ffffffffa01441b6>] usb_hcd_submit_urb+0x316/0x9c0 [usbcore]
> [<ffffffff810bce80>] ? rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0x40/0x80
> [<ffffffff810e0043>] ? module_assert_mutex_or_preempt+0x13/0x50
> [<ffffffff810e0c07>] ? __module_address+0x27/0xf0
> [<ffffffffa01456e4>] usb_submit_urb+0x2c4/0x520 [usbcore]
> [<ffffffffa0145fea>] usb_start_wait_urb+0x5a/0xe0 [usbcore]
> [<ffffffffa014612c>] usb_control_msg+0xbc/0xf0 [usbcore]
> [<ffffffff810e0c07>] ? __module_address+0x27/0xf0
> [<ffffffffa079a724>] usbhid_raw_request+0xa4/0x180 [usbhid]
> [<ffffffffa07a93b1>] hidled_recv+0x71/0xe0 [hid_led]
> [<ffffffffa07a947d>] thingm_init+0x2d/0x50 [hid_led]
> [<ffffffffa07a969b>] hidled_probe+0xcb/0x24a [hid_led]
> [<ffffffff814d96f2>] hid_device_probe+0xd2/0x150
> [<ffffffff8146023d>] driver_probe_device+0x1fd/0x2c0
> [<ffffffff8146039a>] __driver_attach+0x9a/0xa0
> [<ffffffff81460300>] ? driver_probe_device+0x2c0/0x2c0
> [<ffffffff8145e25d>] bus_for_each_dev+0x5d/0x90
> [<ffffffff8145fa79>] driver_attach+0x19/0x20
> [<ffffffff8145f5ff>] bus_add_driver+0x11f/0x220
> [<ffffffffa07ac000>] ? 0xffffffffa07ac000
> [<ffffffff8146086b>] driver_register+0x5b/0xd0
> [<ffffffffa07ac000>] ? 0xffffffffa07ac000
> [<ffffffff814d83d1>] __hid_register_driver+0x61/0xa0
> [<ffffffffa07ac01e>] hidled_driver_init+0x1e/0x20 [hid_led]
> [<ffffffff81000408>] do_one_initcall+0x38/0x150
> [<ffffffff810bce80>] ? rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0x40/0x80
> [<ffffffff81194ca0>] ? kmem_cache_alloc_trace+0x1d0/0x230
> [<ffffffff811342f9>] do_init_module+0x5a/0x1cb
> [<ffffffff810e3862>] load_module+0x1e42/0x2530
> [<ffffffff810e0990>] ? __symbol_put+0x50/0x50
> [<ffffffff810dfc50>] ? show_coresize+0x30/0x30
> [<ffffffff811ad650>] ? kernel_read_file+0x100/0x190
> [<ffffffff811ad794>] ? kernel_read_file_from_fd+0x44/0x70
> [<ffffffff810e415a>] SYSC_finit_module+0xba/0xc0
> [<ffffffff810e4179>] SyS_finit_module+0x9/0x10
> [<ffffffff815e082a>] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath+0x18/0xad
> ---[ end trace c9e6ea27003ecf9e ]---
>
> Fix this by using a kmalloc'ed buffer when calling hid_hw_raw_request.
>
> Signed-off-by: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> v2:
> - Based on a comment from Alan Stern allocate the buffer to be provided to
> hid_hw_raw_request separately (and not as part of struct hidled_device).
> Alternative would have been to allocate the buffer dynamically in each
> function calling hidled_send/_recv. However this would mean more overhead
> IMHO, and we'd need an error path in callers to free the buffer in case
> of an error.
> In addition we have better control that a proper buffer is used in case
> the driver is extended by somebody for supporting another LED device.
> ---
Looks like the receive function is only called from .probe(), so this
should be safe.
However, for the send function, is there a chance there can be a
concurrent access of the buffer? (like 2 userspace processes writing a
different values at the same time).
If so, then you'll need to add a locking mechanism (can't recall if the
LED API provide one for us or not), or just alloc/free the buffers
directly.
If no, the patch is:
Reviewed-by: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cheers,
Benjamin
> drivers/hid/hid-led.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-led.c b/drivers/hid/hid-led.c
> index d8d55f3..555c88e 100644
> --- a/drivers/hid/hid-led.c
> +++ b/drivers/hid/hid-led.c
> @@ -100,6 +100,7 @@ struct hidled_device {
> const struct hidled_config *config;
> struct hid_device *hdev;
> struct hidled_rgb *rgb;
> + u8 *buf;
> struct mutex lock;
> };
>
> @@ -118,13 +119,19 @@ static int hidled_send(struct hidled_device *ldev, __u8 *buf)
>
> mutex_lock(&ldev->lock);
>
> + /*
> + * buffer provided to hid_hw_raw_request must not be on the stack
> + * and must not be part of a data structure
> + */
> + memcpy(ldev->buf, buf, ldev->config->report_size);
> +
> if (ldev->config->report_type == RAW_REQUEST)
> - ret = hid_hw_raw_request(ldev->hdev, buf[0], buf,
> + ret = hid_hw_raw_request(ldev->hdev, buf[0], ldev->buf,
> ldev->config->report_size,
> HID_FEATURE_REPORT,
> HID_REQ_SET_REPORT);
> else if (ldev->config->report_type == OUTPUT_REPORT)
> - ret = hid_hw_output_report(ldev->hdev, buf,
> + ret = hid_hw_output_report(ldev->hdev, ldev->buf,
> ldev->config->report_size);
> else
> ret = -EINVAL;
> @@ -147,17 +154,21 @@ static int hidled_recv(struct hidled_device *ldev, __u8 *buf)
>
> mutex_lock(&ldev->lock);
>
> - ret = hid_hw_raw_request(ldev->hdev, buf[0], buf,
> + memcpy(ldev->buf, buf, ldev->config->report_size);
> +
> + ret = hid_hw_raw_request(ldev->hdev, buf[0], ldev->buf,
> ldev->config->report_size,
> HID_FEATURE_REPORT,
> HID_REQ_SET_REPORT);
> if (ret < 0)
> goto err;
>
> - ret = hid_hw_raw_request(ldev->hdev, buf[0], buf,
> + ret = hid_hw_raw_request(ldev->hdev, buf[0], ldev->buf,
> ldev->config->report_size,
> HID_FEATURE_REPORT,
> HID_REQ_GET_REPORT);
> +
> + memcpy(buf, ldev->buf, ldev->config->report_size);
> err:
> mutex_unlock(&ldev->lock);
>
> @@ -447,6 +458,10 @@ static int hidled_probe(struct hid_device *hdev, const struct hid_device_id *id)
> if (!ldev)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> + ldev->buf = devm_kmalloc(&hdev->dev, MAX_REPORT_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!ldev->buf)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> ret = hid_parse(hdev);
> if (ret)
> return ret;
> --
> 2.10.0
>
>
--
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
