linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Skip deferred request irqs for devices known to fail

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sun, 18 Aug 2019 20:59:09 +0200
From:   Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
To:     Ian W MORRISON <ianwmorrison@...il.com>
Cc:     benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com, mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        linus.walleij@...aro.org, bgolaszewski@...libre.com,
        linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Skip deferred request irqs for devices known to fail

Hi Ian, et. al.,

On 23-03-19 04:39, Ian W MORRISON wrote:
> Hi Hans,
> 
>> IMHO we need to root-cause this problem a bit more before applying this
>> kludge.
>>
>> Can you provide an ACPI dump of one of the affected machines ?
>>
> 
> Attached is an ACPI dump.

First of all sorry for taking way too long to get back to you on this.

So I've taken a look at all the _AEI code in the DSDT, a whole bunch of
it seems copy and pasted from various tablets, but nothing really
stands out as being a likely cause of this.

As such I guess we may need to go with the blacklist patch you suggested
which sucks, but having these devices not boot sucks even harder.

I guess this problem did not magically fix it self in the mean time
(with newer kernels) ?

Can you resubmit your patch with Andy's review remarks addressed?

In case you've lost Andy's reply I will reproduce the review remarks
below.

Regards,

Hans

p.s.

Andy's review remarks as promised:

 >  #include <linux/interrupt.h>
 >  #include <linux/mutex.h>
 >  #include <linux/pinctrl/pinctrl.h>
 > +#include <linux/dmi.h>

This should be in order.

 >  /* Run deferred acpi_gpiochip_request_irqs() */
 > +/* but exclude devices known to fail */

/*
  * This should be done in the similar style
  * as for multi-line comments. Like this one.
  */

 > +	dmi_id = dmi_first_match(skip_deferred_request_irqs_table);
 > +

Redundant blank line.

 > +	if (! dmi_id) {

No space here, however, better to write positive conditional.