at 17:42, Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 6:11 AM Kai-Heng Feng
<kai.heng.feng@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Commit 71f6fa90a353 ("HID: increase maximum global item tag report size
to 256") increases the max report size from 128 to 256.
We also need to update the report size in hid_field_extract() otherwise
it complains and truncates now valid report size:
[ 406.165461] hid-sensor-hub 001F:8086:22D8.0002: hid_field_extract()
called with n (192) > 32! (kworker/5:1)
BugLink: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1818547
Fixes: 71f6fa90a353 ("HID: increase maximum global item tag report size
to 256")
Signed-off-by: Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/hid/hid-core.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-core.c b/drivers/hid/hid-core.c
index 9993b692598f..860e21ec6a49 100644
--- a/drivers/hid/hid-core.c
+++ b/drivers/hid/hid-core.c
@@ -1301,10 +1301,10 @@ static u32 __extract(u8 *report, unsigned
offset, int n)
u32 hid_field_extract(const struct hid_device *hid, u8 *report,
unsigned offset, unsigned n)
Ronald (Cc-ed) raised quite a good point:
what's the benefit of removing the error message if this function (and
__extract) can only report an unsigned 32 bits value?
I didn’t spot this, sorry.
My take is we should revert 94a9992f7dbdfb28976b upstream and think at
a better solution.
I think using a new fix to replace it will be a better approach, as it at
least partially solves the issue.
Kai-Heng
Cheers,
Benjamin
{
- if (n > 32) {
- hid_warn(hid, "hid_field_extract() called with n (%d) >
32! (%s)\n",
+ if (n > 256) {
+ hid_warn(hid, "hid_field_extract() called with n (%d) >
256! (%s)\n",
n, current->comm);
- n = 32;
+ n = 256;
}
return __extract(report, offset, n);
—
2.17.1
