From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Emfox Zhou" <emfox@debian.org>
Cc: linux-input@vger.kernel.org, dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/5] HID: intel-thc-hid: intel-ipts: register the HID device
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2026 21:54:34 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <sashiko-outbox-215052@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261114214026.2809740-4-emfox@debian.org>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential
issue to consider:
- [Medium] HID: intel-thc-hid: broken feature_seq check in
thc_ipts_get_feature()
--
commit 933c7f8eb6c2821b64a9386be774666dc0883345
Author: Emfox Zhou <emfox@debian.org>
HID: intel-thc-hid: intel-ipts: register the HID device
This commit registers a HID device for the IPTS port and implements report
descriptor parsing, input report forwarding, and raw feature/output report
requests over DMA.
> diff --git a/drivers/hid/intel-thc-hid/intel-ipts/ipts.c b/drivers/hid/intel-thc-hid/intel-ipts/ipts.c
> index b48199448dbec..80973944a8994 100644
> --- a/drivers/hid/intel-thc-hid/intel-ipts/ipts.c
> +++ b/drivers/hid/intel-thc-hid/intel-ipts/ipts.c
[ ... ]
> +/* The report is collected in a private buffer; the caller copies it out. */
> +static void thc_ipts_feature(struct thc_ipts *idev, const u8 *data,
> + size_t len)
> +{
> + if (!len)
> + return;
> +
> + /*
> + * A request that timed out is dropped by the sender, which may be
> + * asking for another report by now: check and copy in one step. The
> + * serial number tells an earlier answer from the one asked for.
> + */
> + spin_lock_irq(&idev->feature_lock);
> + if (!idev->feature_pending ||
> + (idev->feature_id && data[0] != idev->feature_id)) {
> + spin_unlock_irq(&idev->feature_lock);
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + len = min(len, idev->max_rx);
> + memcpy(idev->feature, data, len);
> + idev->feature_len = len;
> + idev->feature_pending = false;
> + idev->feature_ack = idev->feature_seq;
> + WRITE_ONCE(idev->feature_done, true);
> + spin_unlock_irq(&idev->feature_lock);
> +
> + wake_up(&idev->wq);
> +}
[ ... ]
> +/*
> + * A feature report is not pushed by the controller: it is asked for and comes
> + * back as a frame of its own, so the request waits for the handler.
> + */
> +static int thc_ipts_get_feature(struct thc_ipts *idev, unsigned char reportnum,
> + u8 *buf, size_t len)
> +{
> + int ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
> + unsigned long timeout = msecs_to_jiffies(THC_IPTS_REQ_TIMEOUT_MS);
> + unsigned int seq;
> + int try;
> +
> + guard(mutex)(&idev->req_lock);
> +
> + /*
> + * The same report may be asked for twice in a row and the answer to
> + * the first request can still be in flight: the ID alone cannot tell
> + * the two apart, so every request carries a serial number.
> + */
> + spin_lock_irq(&idev->feature_lock);
> + WRITE_ONCE(idev->feature_done, false);
> + idev->feature_id = reportnum;
> + idev->feature_pending = true;
> + seq = ++idev->feature_seq;
> + spin_unlock_irq(&idev->feature_lock);
> +
> + for (try = 0; try < THC_IPTS_REQ_TRIES; try++) {
> + ret = thc_ipts_send(idev, THC_IPTS_TX_GET_FEATURE, &reportnum,
> + 1);
> + if (ret)
> + break;
> +
> + if (wait_event_timeout(idev->wq,
> + READ_ONCE(idev->feature_done) &&
> + READ_ONCE(idev->feature_ack) == seq,
> + timeout)) {
> + ret = 0;
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
> + }
[Severity: Medium]
Can idev->feature_seq distinguish a delayed reply to an earlier request from
the current request?
thc_ipts_get_feature() only transmits reportnum on the wire, and
thc_ipts_feature() unconditionally sets idev->feature_ack = idev->feature_seq
whenever a matching report ID arrives while idev->feature_pending is true.
Because idev->feature_seq is only updated under idev->req_lock at the start
of thc_ipts_get_feature(), a late reply from a timed-out request for the
same report ID will be stamped with the new request's sequence number and
consumed as the new answer.
In addition, idev->feature_done and idev->feature_pending are initialized
once before the retry loop rather than on each attempt. If
wait_event_timeout() expires on try 0 and the delayed reply arrives just as
try 1 begins, thc_ipts_feature() sets feature_done = true and
feature_pending = false before try 1 calls thc_ipts_send(). Try 1 then
sends a duplicate THC_IPTS_TX_GET_FEATURE frame before checking
feature_done, leaving an extra reply in flight (or failing the request if
thc_ipts_send() returns an error even though the reply already arrived).
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261114214026.2809740-1-emfox@debian.org?part=3
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-14 21:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-14 21:40 [PATCH v4 0/5] HID: intel-thc-hid: intel-ipts: support THC IPTS ports Emfox Zhou
2026-11-14 21:40 ` [PATCH v4 1/5] HID: intel-thc-hid: intel-ipts: bring up the port Emfox Zhou
2026-11-14 21:40 ` [PATCH v4 2/5] HID: intel-thc-hid: intel-ipts: receive reports Emfox Zhou
2026-11-14 22:00 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-14 21:40 ` [PATCH v4 3/5] HID: intel-thc-hid: intel-ipts: register the HID device Emfox Zhou
2026-11-14 21:54 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-11-14 21:40 ` [PATCH v4 4/5] HID: intel-thc-hid: intel-ipts: handle system sleep Emfox Zhou
2026-11-14 21:40 ` [PATCH v4 5/5] HID: intel-thc-hid: intel-ipts: document the IPTS mode Emfox Zhou
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=sashiko-outbox-215052@kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
--cc=emfox@debian.org \
--cc=linux-input@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
/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