Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Thu, 25 May 2023 13:10:00 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>
To:     Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com>
cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linux regressions mailing list <regressions@lists.linux.dev>,
        Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>,
        =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Filipe_La=EDns?= <lains@riseup.net>,
        Bastien Nocera <hadess@hadess.net>,
        "open list:HID CORE LAYER" <linux-input@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, guy.b@bluewin.ch
Subject: Re: [regression] Since kernel 6.3.1 logitech unify receiver not
 working properly
In-Reply-To: <CAO-hwJ+MTRu9KxqwQc7UYFBsa0kkrnYfwVB30KsLZnw=wfcOMg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <nycvar.YFH.7.76.2305251308471.29760@cbobk.fhfr.pm>
References: <9b987585-0834-bb8c-3414-283c29f3f2ab@leemhuis.info> <bec024d5-4088-00ae-f7b5-7188868b1707@leemhuis.info> <b7717c43-74bf-b91d-d3ce-874493df602c@gmail.com> <CAO-hwJ+At1J_yUpX2q_dJekzZ-PoTDAvxmkTk_e4Yu0Z338bEA@mail.gmail.com>
 <55dda0bb-fe42-6dee-28ea-00121554d092@leemhuis.info> <CAHk-=whvhkSk6m8_AidhofgR9nq0Md+HbNad5r1RE69tZgbv6Q@mail.gmail.com> <nycvar.YFH.7.76.2305231422180.29760@cbobk.fhfr.pm> <CAO-hwJ+MTRu9KxqwQc7UYFBsa0kkrnYfwVB30KsLZnw=wfcOMg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (LSU 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 24 May 2023, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:

> > > That bug is pre-existing (ie the problem was not introduced by that
> > > commit), but who knows if the retry makes things worse (ie if it then
> > > triggers on a retry, the response data will be the *previous* response).
> > >
> > > The whole "goto exit" games should be removed too, because we're in a
> > > for-loop, and instead of "goto exit" it should just do "break".
> > >
> > > IOW, something like this might be worth testing.
> > >
> > > That said, while I think the code is buggy, I doubt this is the actual
> > > cause of the problem people are reporting. But it would be lovely to
> > > hear if the attached patch makes any difference, and I think this is
> > > fixing a real - but unlikely - problem anyway.
> 
> FWIW, Linus, your patch is
> Reviewed-by: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com>
> 
> Feel free to submit it to us or to apply it directly if you prefer as
> this is clearly a fix for a code path issue.

It would be nice to hear from the people who were able to reproduce the 
issue whether this makes any observable difference in behavior though. I 
don't currently think it would, as it fixes a potential NULL pointer 
dereference, which is not what has been reported.

Has anyone of the affected people tried to bisect the issue?

Thanks,

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs