linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] ACPI: Execute the

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:	Mon, 30 May 2016 03:28:59 +0000
From:	Ocean HY1 He <hehy1@...ovo.com>
To:	Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>,
	"jcm@...hat.com" <jcm@...hat.com>
CC:	"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Tanaka <dtanaka@...ovo.com>,
	Nagananda Chumbalkar <nchumbalkar@...ovo.com>,
	"rjw@...ysocki.net" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	"lenb@...nel.org" <lenb@...nel.org>,
	"wefu@...hat.com" <wefu@...hat.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] ACPI: Execute the _PTS method when system reboot

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Prarit Bhargava [mailto:prarit@...hat.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 6:16 PM
> To: Ocean HY1 He; jcm@...hat.com
> Cc: linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; David Tanaka;
> Nagananda Chumbalkar; rjw@...ysocki.net; lenb@...nel.org;
> wefu@...hat.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI: Execute the _PTS method when system reboot
> 
> 
> 
> On 05/24/2016 02:41 AM, Ocean HY1 He wrote:
> > Hi Prarit and Jon,
> >
> > How do you think of this?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Ocean He / 何海洋
> > SW Development Dept.
> > Beijing Design Center
> > Enterprise Product Group
> > Mobile: 18911778926
> > E-mail: hehy1@...ovo.com
> > No.6 Chuang Ye Road, Haidian District, Beijing, China 100085
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ocean HY1 He
> > Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 11:04 AM
> > To: rjw@...ysocki.net; lenb@...nel.org
> > Cc: linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; David
> Tanaka; Nagananda Chumbalkar
> > Subject: RE: [PATCH] ACPI: Execute the _PTS method when system
> reboot
> >
> > To whom may concern,
> >
> > A Lenovo feature depends on _PTS method execution when reboot. And
> after check the ACPI spec, I think _PTS should be exectued when reboo.
> This patch could fix the problem.
> >
> > Any comments of this patch? Many thanks!
> >
> > Ocean He / 何海洋
> > SW Development Dept.
> > Beijing Design Center
> > Enterprise Product Group
> > Mobile: 18911778926
> > E-mail: hehy1@...ovo.com
> > No.6 Chuang Ye Road, Haidian District, Beijing, China 100085
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ocean HY1 He
> > Sent: Monday, May 09, 2016 1:50 PM
> > To: rjw@...ysocki.net; lenb@...nel.org
> > Cc: linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; David
> Tanaka; Ocean HY1 He; Nagananda Chumbalkar
> > Subject: [PATCH] ACPI: Execute the _PTS method when system reboot
> >
> > The _PTS control method is defined in the section 7.4.1 of acpi 6.0
> > spec. The _PTS control method is executed by the OS during the sleep
> > transition process for S1, S2, S3, S4, and for orderly S5 shutdown.
> > The sleeping state value (For example, 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 for the S5
> > soft-off state) is passed to the _PTS control method. This method
> > is called after OSPM has notified native device drivers of the sleep
> > state transition and before the OSPM has had a chance to fully
> > prepare the system for a sleep state transition.
> >
> > The _PTS control method provides the BIOS a mechanism for performing
> > some housekeeping, such as writing the sleep type value to the
> embedded
> > controller, before entering the system sleeping state.
> >
> > According to section 7.5 of acpi 6.0 spec, _PTS should run after _TTS.
> >
> > Thus, a _PTS block notifier is added to the reboot notifier list so that
> > the _PTS object will also be evaluated when the system reboot.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ocean He <hehy1@...ovo.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Nagananda Chumbalkar <nchumbalkar@...ovo.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/acpi/sleep.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/sleep.c b/drivers/acpi/sleep.c
> > index 2a8b596..8b290fb 100644
> > --- a/drivers/acpi/sleep.c
> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/sleep.c
> > @@ -55,6 +55,26 @@ static struct notifier_block tts_notifier = {
> >  	.priority	= 0,
> >  };
> >
> > +static int pts_notify_reboot(struct notifier_block *this,
> > +			unsigned long code, void *x)
> > +{
> > +	acpi_status status;
> > +
> > +	status = acpi_execute_simple_method(NULL, "\\_PTS",
> ACPI_STATE_S5);
> > +	if (ACPI_FAILURE(status) && status != AE_NOT_FOUND) {
> > +		/* It won't break anything. */
> > +		printk(KERN_NOTICE "Failure in evaluating _PTS object\n");
> 
> ^^^^
> 	pr_debug("No _PTS object found.\n");
> 
> It isn't a warning or error, so don't put the word "Failure" in there.
> 
> Beyond that, looks entirely reasonable to me.
> 
> P.
> 
Hi Prarit,

The message outputs when _PTS is found but fail to execute. I copy this code
from existed function acpi_sleep_tts_switch(). I just wants to keep new codes
as the same style as existed codes. Make sense? ;-)

Ocean.
> 
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	return NOTIFY_DONE;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static struct notifier_block pts_notifier = {
> > +	.notifier_call	= pts_notify_reboot,
> > +	.next		= NULL,
> > +	.priority	= 0,
> > +};
> > +
> >  static int acpi_sleep_prepare(u32 acpi_state)
> >  {
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP
> > @@ -896,5 +916,12 @@ int __init acpi_sleep_init(void)
> >  	 * object can also be evaluated when the system enters S5.
> >  	 */
> >  	register_reboot_notifier(&tts_notifier);
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * According to section 7.5 of acpi 6.0 spec, _PTS should run after
> > +	 * _TTS when the system enters S5.
> > +	 */
> > +	register_reboot_notifier(&pts_notifier);
> > +
> >  	return 0;
> >  }
> >