mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
To: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@hmh.eng.br>
Cc: Linux Input <linux-input@vger.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@windriver.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Input: implement sysrq as an input handler
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 11:03:14 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100319180314.GB12143@core.coreip.homeip.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100319160641.GC16743@khazad-dum.debian.net>

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 01:06:41PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Mar 2010, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 09:00:43PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > > Any chance of the user being able to avoid the SysRQ events getting to the
> > > handle, e.g. by opening the input device in exclusive mode or something like
> > > that?
> > 
> > Yes, it is a possible to suppress SysRq by grabbing an input device.
> > This possibility exisst with the current implementation too though -
> > after all legacy keyboard driver implemented as an input handler as
> > well.
> > 
> > ... or am I answering a question different from the one you asked? ;)
> 
> No, that's exactly what I wanted to know.
> 
> What about SAK?  That thing *has* to be untrappable.
> 

On what level untrapable? And what exactly is SAK? There is not a
special key, at least not in general case, it is an action assigned to a
key comboi.  Root can "trap" legacy keyboard SAK with loadkeys; it can
also disable sysrq, unload modules and do other nasty things. But
ordinary users can not trap it.

> Even for the SysRQ debug events, I'd feel better if we could have a class of
> system input handlers that cannot be suppressed to use for these things.

That would require moving "these things", including their state
machines, into input core otherwise it would not know what events can be
trappable and which should be passed through. Or we should get rid of
EVIOCGRAB.

Given the fact that event devices are accessible only to root I think
that current behavior is acceptable.

-- 
Dmitry

  reply	other threads:[~2010-03-19 18:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-03-17  6:19 Dmitry Torokhov
2010-03-19  0:00 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2010-03-19  0:09   ` Dmitry Torokhov
2010-03-19 16:06     ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2010-03-19 18:03       ` Dmitry Torokhov [this message]
2010-03-20  2:53         ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2010-03-22  4:59           ` Dmitry Torokhov
2010-04-01 13:34             ` Pavel Machek
2010-04-01 15:42               ` Dmitry Torokhov
2010-04-04 13:27                 ` Pavel Machek
2010-04-16  5:33                   ` Dmitry Torokhov
2010-03-19  0:13 ` Randy Dunlap
2010-03-19  0:30   ` 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=20100319180314.GB12143@core.coreip.homeip.net \
    --to=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
    --cc=hmh@hmh.eng.br \
    --cc=jason.wessel@windriver.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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®