On  5.01.2016 03:19, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
        /* First validate */
-       for (i = 0; i < ddata->pdata->nbuttons; i++) {
-               struct gpio_button_data *bdata = &ddata->data[i];
+       for (i = 0; i < n_events; i++) {


Yeah, seems I must have overslept that helper, will send an updated version.

OTOH maybe we should do

        bitmap = get_bitmap_events_by_type(type); // new, return keybit or swbit

new helper function? or static function in gpio-keys? who allocates/frees the bitmap memory? or this is static data? Maybe I don't get the idea :) .

        if (!bitmap_subset(bits, bitmap, n_events)) {
                error = -EINVAL;
                goto out;

... and leave the rest of the loop as is?

Not sure about that. Unless I miss something, what we want is:

1. make sure that what user has written is within the range of the event type. I hope bitmap_parselist already does it for us.

2. Make sure that for every bit in bits set based on what user has provided, there is a matching gpio in this particular gpio-keys device.

3. Make sure that every gpio user wants disabled is actually allowed to be disabled.

I don't see how 2 is achieved with ^^^ code.

So, shall I send a new version of the patch with for_each_set_bit() used, or you'll fix the $subject problem with whatever magic you think is needed?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to