Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 10:39 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 10:20:35AM +0200, Greg KH wrote: >> > > are written using a hip new VM? >> > >> > Ugh, don't mention UDI, that's a bad flashback... >> >> But that is very much what we are doing here. >> >> > I thought the goal here was to move a lot of the quirk handling and >> > "fixup the broken HID decriptors in this device" out of kernel .c code >> > and into BPF code instead, which this patchset would allow. > > Yes, quirks are a big motivation for this work. Right now half of the > HID drivers are less than 100 lines of code, and are just trivial > fixes (one byte in the report descriptor, one key mapping, etc...). > Using eBPF for those would simplify the process from the user point of > view: you drop a "firmware fix" as an eBPF program in your system and > you can continue working on your existing kernel. How do you envision those BPF programs living, and how would they be distributed? (In-tree / out of tree?) -Toke
