linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/8] ACPI: Use GPE reference counting to support shared GPEs

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 19 Feb 2010 22:08:24 +0100
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Jin Dongming <jin.dongming@...css.fujitsu.com>
Cc:	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
	"Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@...el.com>,
	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
	ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	pm list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
	Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@...com>,
	Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org>,
	Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Gary Hade <garyhade@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8] ACPI: Use GPE reference counting to support shared GPEs

On Friday 19 February 2010, Jin Dongming wrote:
> Hi, Rafael J. Wysocki
> 
> Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Thursday 18 February 2010, Jin Dongming wrote:
> >> Hi, Rafael J. Wysocki
> >>> -	/* Update enable mask, but don't enable the HW GPE as of yet */
> >>> -
> >>> -	status = acpi_ev_enable_gpe(gpe_event_info, FALSE);
> > 
> > You could preserve some more context.
> > 
> >> I think the above line code should be remained. If it is deleted, the exception 
> >> event will be raised on some machine.
> > 
> > Why would it?  The GPE is still disabled at the hardware level at this point.
> > 
> > Rafael
> > 
> > 
> I am very sorry for my wrong comment. The GPE is still disabled as you wrote.
> 
> The error message what I got was not caused by GPE event, it was caused by the "status"
> variable which had not been deleted on x86-next tree. And it is also deleted at this
> file. So I don't there is problem here.

Great, thanks for the review.

Rafael
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/