From: "Henrik Rydberg" <rydberg@euromail.se>
To: Chase Douglas <chasedouglas@gmail.com>
Cc: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Input: Add EVIOC mechanism for MT slots
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 20:40:36 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120205194036.GA2566@polaris.bitmath.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F2EB8C8.9090102@gmail.com>
> > Besides leaving a possible giant stack crash in your code, it assumes
> > memory is somehow magically allocated. Not good practise in low-level
> > programming. You wouldn't use a template this way, would you?
>
> No, which is why I think this interface is bad. I should be able to
> dynamically set the size of the array, but it's not possible with this
> interface.
It is possible (using num_slots == 0 or creating your own struct), but
not ideal, granted. The patch serves the purpose of definining the
binary interface, the rest is up to userland.
> I think the implementation is fine in terms of how the plumbing works. I
> just don't think this macro should be included. Make the user create the
> struct themselves:
>
> In linux/input.h:
>
> struct input_mt_request {
> __u32 code;
> __s32 values[];
> };
The above (the first) version is not ideal either, since it cannot be
used as it is.
> It could be argued that we should leave the macro around for people who
> want to statically define the size of the request, but I think that is
> leading them down the wrong path. It's easier, but it will lead to
> broken code if you pick the wrong size.
Rather than creating both a suboptimal static and a suboptimal dynamic
version, removing the struct altogether is tempting. All that is
really needed is a clear definition of the binary interface. The rest
can easily be set up in userland, using whatever method is preferred.
Thanks.
Henrik
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-02-05 19:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-31 19:00 [PATCH v3] Input: Add EVIOC mechanism for MT slots Henrik Rydberg
2012-02-03 0:05 ` Chase Douglas
2012-02-03 7:27 ` Henrik Rydberg
2012-02-04 18:21 ` Chase Douglas
2012-02-05 7:59 ` Henrik Rydberg
2012-02-05 17:13 ` Chase Douglas
2012-02-05 19:40 ` Henrik Rydberg [this message]
2012-02-05 22:55 ` Chase Douglas
2012-02-06 7:25 ` Dmitry Torokhov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120205194036.GA2566@polaris.bitmath.org \
--to=rydberg@euromail.se \
--cc=chasedouglas@gmail.com \
--cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-input@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).