tree f08cf0e2a4afbd007fbc11864cd3c4fa0df6e9d8
parent e9b765decfb49ddc105d303d491e1bee9769436f
author Christian Krause <chkr@plauener.de> 1129584648 -0700
committer Linus Torvalds <torvalds@g5.osdl.org> 1129585549 -0700

[PATCH] USB: fix bug in handling of highspeed usb HID devices

During the development of an USB device I found a bug in the handling of
Highspeed HID devices in the kernel.

What happened?

Highspeed HID devices are correctly recognized and enumerated by the
kernel. But even if usbhid kernel module is loaded, no HID reports are
received by the kernel.

The output of the hardware USB analyzer told me that the host doesn't
even poll for interrupt IN transfers (even the "interrupt in" USB
transfer are polled by the host).

After some debugging in hid-core.c I've found the reason.

In case of a highspeed device, the endpoint interval is re-calculated in
driver/usb/input/hid-core.c:

line 1669:
             /* handle potential highspeed HID correctly */
             interval = endpoint->bInterval;
             if (dev->speed == USB_SPEED_HIGH)
                   interval = 1 << (interval - 1);

Basically this calculation is correct (refer to USB 2.0 spec, 9.6.6).
This new calculated value of "interval" is used as input for
usb_fill_int_urb:

line 1685:

            usb_fill_int_urb(hid->urbin, dev, pipe, hid->inbuf, 0,
                   hid_irq_in, hid, interval);

Unfortunately the same calculation as above is done a second time in
usb_fill_int_urb in the file include/linux/usb.h:

line 933:
        if (dev->speed == USB_SPEED_HIGH)
                urb->interval = 1 << (interval - 1);
        else
                urb->interval = interval;

This means, that if the endpoint descriptor (of a high speed device)
specifies e.g. bInterval = 7, the urb->interval gets the value:

hid-core.c: interval = 1 << (7-1) = 0x40 = 64
urb->interval = 1 << (interval -1) = 1 << (63) = integer overflow

Because of this the value of urb->interval is sometimes negative and is
rejected in core/urb.c:
line 353:
                /* too small? */
                if (urb->interval <= 0)
                        return -EINVAL;

The conclusion is, that the recalculaton of the interval (which is
necessary for highspeed) should not be made twice, because this is
simply wrong. ;-)

Re-calculation in usb_fill_int_urb makes more sense, because it is the
most general approach. So it would make sense to remove it from
hid-core.c.

Because in hid-core.c the interval variable is only used for calling
usb_fill_int_urb, it is no problem to remove the highspeed
re-calculation in this file.

Signed-off-by: Christian Krause <chkr@plauener.de>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>