On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 06:23:13PM +0100, Lars Knudsen wrote: > > > On Jan 10, 2017 18:19, "Greg KH" <g...@kroah.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 06:04:46PM +0100, Lars Knudsen wrote: > > I figured that made most sense :) > > > > Still, it would be good if we could have a rule to not grab the CDC > interface > > part if the device includes WebUSB functionality. > > What exactly do you mean by "grab"? > > MM probing :)
Probe should be fine, right? Are you really thinking that MM needs to go "oh look, a cdc device, let's go look at all of the raw interfaces to ensure it really isn't a webusb device as well before I touch it!" That way lies madness... What's wrong with touching it? The kernel already did, why would userspace care? > > The likelihood of a modem+WebUSB combo is so small that it must fall > > in the category where potential rare exotic devices combining it must > > be whitelisted and the rest be left alone. > > I think you misunderstand just how crazy firmware authors can be. I'm > sure we will see those types of devices in the wild. > > ...But realistically how many? Bothering 99.9% to support the special case > seems less logical than just finding the 0.1% and whitelisting it (if needed) That's the joy of writing an operating system for all devices on the planet, those 0.1% can be a lot of devices :) Anyway, I don't think there's much to do here just yet, let's wait and see just how bad these webusb devices end up looking like... thanks, greg k-h _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel