| Message ID | 20171005180404.15044-2-hdegoede@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Delegated to: | Andy Shevchenko |
| Headers | show |
On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 9:04 PM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote: > It seems that the WMI GUID used by the PEAQ 2-in-1 WMI hotkeys is not > as unique as a GUID should be and is used on some other devices too. > > This is causing spurious key-press reports on these other devices. > > This commits adds a DMI check to the PEAQ 2-in-1 WMI hotkeys driver to > ensure that it is actually running on a PEAQ 2-in-1, fixing the > spurious key-presses on these other devices. Thanks! One comment though. > static void __exit peaq_wmi_exit(void) > { > + if (!dmi_check_system(peaq_dmi_table)) > + return; > + > if (!wmi_has_guid(PEAQ_DOLBY_BUTTON_GUID)) > return; I was thinking, after got kbuid bot complains on Kai's patch on sections mismatch, do we need these checks at all? How would be possible to get a module loaded in the first place if system is not in whitelist? If I'm right, please, drop the check and move table to __initconst.
On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 09:19:23PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 9:04 PM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote: > > It seems that the WMI GUID used by the PEAQ 2-in-1 WMI hotkeys is not > > as unique as a GUID should be and is used on some other devices too. > > > > This is causing spurious key-press reports on these other devices. > > > > This commits adds a DMI check to the PEAQ 2-in-1 WMI hotkeys driver to > > ensure that it is actually running on a PEAQ 2-in-1, fixing the > > spurious key-presses on these other devices. > > Thanks! > > One comment though. > > > static void __exit peaq_wmi_exit(void) > > { > > + if (!dmi_check_system(peaq_dmi_table)) > > + return; > > + > > if (!wmi_has_guid(PEAQ_DOLBY_BUTTON_GUID)) > > return; > > I was thinking, after got kbuid bot complains on Kai's patch on > sections mismatch, do we need these checks at all? > How would be possible to get a module loaded in the first place if > system is not in whitelist? > I was wondering this myself.
On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 9:04 PM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote: > It seems that the WMI GUID used by the PEAQ 2-in-1 WMI hotkeys is not > as unique as a GUID should be and is used on some other devices too. > > This is causing spurious key-press reports on these other devices. > > This commits adds a DMI check to the PEAQ 2-in-1 WMI hotkeys driver to > ensure that it is actually running on a PEAQ 2-in-1, fixing the > spurious key-presses on these other devices. > > BugLink: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1497861 > BugLink: https://bugzilla.suse.com/attachment.cgi?id=743182 > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org So, I have pushed to my review queue as is, though please consider my comments in perhaps a separate patch. Thanks! > Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> > --- > drivers/platform/x86/peaq-wmi.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/peaq-wmi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/peaq-wmi.c > index bc98ef95514a..67fa3fa32011 100644 > --- a/drivers/platform/x86/peaq-wmi.c > +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/peaq-wmi.c > @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ > */ > > #include <linux/acpi.h> > +#include <linux/dmi.h> > #include <linux/input-polldev.h> > #include <linux/kernel.h> > #include <linux/module.h> > @@ -64,8 +65,22 @@ static void peaq_wmi_poll(struct input_polled_dev *dev) > } > } > > +/* Some other devices (Shuttle XS35) use the same WMI GUID for other purposes */ > +static const struct dmi_system_id peaq_dmi_table[] = { > + { > + .matches = { > + DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "PEAQ"), > + DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "PEAQ PMM C1010 MD99187"), > + }, > + }, > +}; > + > static int __init peaq_wmi_init(void) > { > + /* WMI GUID is not unique, also check for a DMI match */ > + if (!dmi_check_system(peaq_dmi_table)) > + return -ENODEV; > + > if (!wmi_has_guid(PEAQ_DOLBY_BUTTON_GUID)) > return -ENODEV; > > @@ -86,6 +101,9 @@ static int __init peaq_wmi_init(void) > > static void __exit peaq_wmi_exit(void) > { > + if (!dmi_check_system(peaq_dmi_table)) > + return; > + > if (!wmi_has_guid(PEAQ_DOLBY_BUTTON_GUID)) > return; > > -- > 2.14.2 >
diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/peaq-wmi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/peaq-wmi.c index bc98ef95514a..67fa3fa32011 100644 --- a/drivers/platform/x86/peaq-wmi.c +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/peaq-wmi.c @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ */ #include <linux/acpi.h> +#include <linux/dmi.h> #include <linux/input-polldev.h> #include <linux/kernel.h> #include <linux/module.h> @@ -64,8 +65,22 @@ static void peaq_wmi_poll(struct input_polled_dev *dev) } } +/* Some other devices (Shuttle XS35) use the same WMI GUID for other purposes */ +static const struct dmi_system_id peaq_dmi_table[] = { + { + .matches = { + DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "PEAQ"), + DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "PEAQ PMM C1010 MD99187"), + }, + }, +}; + static int __init peaq_wmi_init(void) { + /* WMI GUID is not unique, also check for a DMI match */ + if (!dmi_check_system(peaq_dmi_table)) + return -ENODEV; + if (!wmi_has_guid(PEAQ_DOLBY_BUTTON_GUID)) return -ENODEV; @@ -86,6 +101,9 @@ static int __init peaq_wmi_init(void) static void __exit peaq_wmi_exit(void) { + if (!dmi_check_system(peaq_dmi_table)) + return; + if (!wmi_has_guid(PEAQ_DOLBY_BUTTON_GUID)) return;
It seems that the WMI GUID used by the PEAQ 2-in-1 WMI hotkeys is not as unique as a GUID should be and is used on some other devices too. This is causing spurious key-press reports on these other devices. This commits adds a DMI check to the PEAQ 2-in-1 WMI hotkeys driver to ensure that it is actually running on a PEAQ 2-in-1, fixing the spurious key-presses on these other devices. BugLink: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1497861 BugLink: https://bugzilla.suse.com/attachment.cgi?id=743182 Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> --- drivers/platform/x86/peaq-wmi.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)