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:	Thu, 21 Feb 2013 16:44:16 +0100
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@...com>
Cc:	ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
	Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>,
	Jiang Liu <liuj97@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [Update][PATCH 2/7] ACPI / scan: Introduce common code for ACPI-based device hotplug

On Wednesday, February 20, 2013 06:17:48 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-02-20 at 23:49 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
>  :
> > +
> > +/**
> > + * acpi_bus_hot_remove_device: hot-remove a device and its children
> > + * @context: struct acpi_eject_event pointer (freed in this func)
> > + *
> > + * Hot-remove a device and its children. This function frees up the
> > + * memory space passed by arg context, so that the caller may call
> > + * this function asynchronously through acpi_os_hotplug_execute().
> > + */
> > +void acpi_bus_hot_remove_device(void *context)
> > +{
> > +	struct acpi_eject_event *ej_event = context;
> > +	struct acpi_device *device = ej_event->device;
> > +	acpi_handle handle = device->handle;
> > +	u32 ost_code = ACPI_OST_SC_SUCCESS;
> > +	int error;
> > +
> > +	mutex_lock(&acpi_scan_lock);
> > +
> > +	error = acpi_scan_hot_remove(device);
> > +	if (error)
> > +		ost_code = ACPI_OST_SC_NON_SPECIFIC_FAILURE;
> > +
> > +	acpi_evaluate_hotplug_ost(handle, ej_event->event, ost_code, NULL);
> 
> Thanks for the quick update.  It fixed the deadlock issue. :-)  As it
> now completes an eject operation, I found a new issue.  When the OS
> called _EJ0, it is not supposed to call _OST since FW has already
> received the completion status from _EJ0.  That is, the OS calls either
> _EJ0 (success case) or _OST (failure case) for hot-delete. 

In fact, I wasn't quite sure about that, so thanks a lot for the clarification.

That makes life a bit easier, actually. :-)

I'll send a second update in a little while.

Thanks,
Rafael


-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ