linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/02] ACPI: sysfs eject support for ACPI scan handlers

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, 8 Feb 2013 10:33:07 +0900
From:	Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@...com>
CC:	<rjw@...k.pl>, <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	<mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>, <matthew.garrett@...ula.com>,
	<yinghai@...nel.org>, <liuj97@...il.com>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/02] ACPI: sysfs eject support for ACPI scan handlers

2013/02/08 10:10, Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-02-08 at 09:50 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
>> Hi Toshi,
>>
>> 2013/02/07 7:50, Toshi Kani wrote:
>>> Changed sysfs eject, acpi_eject_store(), to support ACPI scan handlers.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@...com>
>>> ---
>>>    drivers/acpi/scan.c |    2 +-
>>>    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/scan.c b/drivers/acpi/scan.c
>>> index cfd7a69..3ff632e 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/scan.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/scan.c
>>> @@ -203,7 +203,7 @@ acpi_eject_store(struct device *d, struct device_attribute *attr,
>>>    		return -EINVAL;
>>>    	}
>>>    #ifndef FORCE_EJECT
>>
>>> -	if (acpi_device->driver == NULL) {
>>> +	if (!acpi_device->driver && !acpi_device->handler) {
>>
>> I don't understand the fix.
>>
>> The if sentence becomes true, when both acpi_device->driver and acpi_device->handler
>> are NULL. It means that acpi_eject_store() runs if either acpi_device->driver or
>> acpi_device->handler has pointer. Is it O.K.?
>
> Yes.
>
>> I think it should be if (!acpi_device->driver || !acpi_device->handler).
>
> No, the condition has to be "&&" because an acpi_device is _either_
> bound to an ACPI driver or an ACPI scan handler.

Thank you for you clarification. I understood it.

Acked-by: Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>

Thanks,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu

>
> Thanks,
> -Toshi
>
>


--
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/