linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] ACPI / dock / PCI: Synchronous handling of dock events for PCI devices

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:	Sun, 23 Jun 2013 13:29:19 -0700
From:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
To:	Jiang Liu <liuj97@...il.com>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	"Alexander E . Patrakov" <patrakov@...il.com>,
	Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...wei.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Yijing Wang <wangyijing@...wei.com>,
	"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] ACPI / dock / PCI: Synchronous handling of dock
 events for PCI devices

On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 8:54 AM, Jiang Liu <liuj97@...il.com> wrote:
>> On 06/23/2013 05:25 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
>>>
>>> The interactions between the ACPI dock driver and the ACPI-based PCI
>>> hotplug (acpiphp) are currently problematic because of ordering
>>> issues during hot-remove operations.
>>>
>>> First of all, the current ACPI glue code expects that physical
>>> devices will always be deleted before deleting the companion ACPI
>>> device objects.  Otherwise, acpi_unbind_one() will fail with a
>>> warning message printed to the kernel log, for example:
>>>
>>> [  185.026073] usb usb5: Oops, 'acpi_handle' corrupt
>>> [  185.035150] pci 0000:1b:00.0: Oops, 'acpi_handle' corrupt
>>> [  185.035515] pci 0000:18:02.0: Oops, 'acpi_handle' corrupt
>>> [  180.013656]  port1: Oops, 'acpi_handle' corrupt
>>>
>> [...]
>>> @@ -597,15 +654,11 @@ register_hotplug_dock_device(acpi_handle
>>>                * ops
>>>                */
>>>               dd = find_dock_dependent_device(dock_station, handle);
>>> -             if (dd) {
>>> -                     dd->ops = ops;
>>> -                     dd->context = context;
>>> -                     dock_add_hotplug_device(dock_station, dd);
>>> -                     ret = 0;
>>> -             }
>>> +             if (dd)
>>> +                     return dock_init_hotplug(dd, ops, context,
>>> +                                              init, release);
>> Hi Rafael,
>>         Seems not an equivalent change. According to the comment just above the
>> code, we shouldn't return but continue here.
>> /*
>>  * An ATA bay can be in a dock and itself can be ejected
>>  * separately, so there are two 'dock stations' which need the
>>  * ops
>>  */
>
> two dock stations:
> Do you mean two dock station has same handle?
>
> dock_add should add correctly flags for IS_DOCK and IS_ATA.
> if one handle has _DCK and _GTF etc.
>
> or do you mean there are two dependent devices with same handle?
> like one is for acpiphp slot and one is for ATA?

related commit:
commit 61b836958371c717d1e6d4fea1d2c512969ad20b
Author: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
Date:   Thu Aug 28 10:07:14 2008 +0800

    dock: fix for ATA bay in a dock station

    an ATA bay can be in a dock and itself can be ejected separately.
    This patch handles such eject bay. Found by Holger.

    Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
    Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>
@@ -618,16 +619,21 @@ register_hotplug_dock_device(acpi_handle handle, struct ac
pi_dock_ops *ops,
         * this would include the dock station itself
         */
        list_for_each_entry(dock_station, &dock_stations, sibiling) {
+               /*
+                * An ATA bay can be in a dock and itself can be ejected
+                * seperately, so there are two 'dock stations' which need the
+                * ops
+                */
                dd = find_dock_dependent_device(dock_station, handle);
                if (dd) {
                        dd->ops = ops;
                        dd->context = context;
                        dock_add_hotplug_device(dock_station, dd);
-                       return 0;
+                       ret = 0;
                }
        }

-       return -EINVAL;
+       return ret;
 }

so two doc station with different handle.

and dependent devices in both...

looks like Rafael's change can not handle this case anymore.

Yinghai
--
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/