linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 5/6] ACPI: Add _OST support for ACPI container hotplug

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:	Tue, 05 Jun 2012 13:39:49 +0900
From:	Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@...com>
CC:	lenb@...nel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
	shuahkhan@...il.com, liuj97@...il.com, andi@...stfloor.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/6] ACPI: Add _OST support for ACPI container hotplug

Hi Toshi,

2012/05/24 11:25, Toshi Kani wrote:
> Changed container_notify_cb() to call ACPI _OST method when ACPI
> container hotplug operation has completed. Slightly restructured
> the code with the same logic. The function sets eject_pending bit
> for an eject request since it does not initiate hot-remove operation.
> This bit is checked by the sysfs eject handler to determine if the
> request is originated from an ACPI eject notification.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Toshi Kani<toshi.kani@...com>
> ---
>   drivers/acpi/container.c |   43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
>   1 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/container.c b/drivers/acpi/container.c
> index 45cd03b..1f9f7d7 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/container.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/container.c
> @@ -158,9 +158,7 @@ static void container_notify_cb(acpi_handle handle, u32 type, void *context)
>   	int result;
>   	int present;
>   	acpi_status status;
> -
> -
> -	present = is_device_present(handle);
> +	u32 ost_code = ACPI_OST_SC_NON_SPECIFIC_FAILURE; /* default */
> 
>   	switch (type) {
>   	case ACPI_NOTIFY_BUS_CHECK:
> @@ -169,32 +167,47 @@ static void container_notify_cb(acpi_handle handle, u32 type, void *context)
>   		printk(KERN_WARNING "Container driver received %s event\n",
>   		       (type == ACPI_NOTIFY_BUS_CHECK) ?
>   		       "ACPI_NOTIFY_BUS_CHECK" : "ACPI_NOTIFY_DEVICE_CHECK");
> +
> +		present = is_device_present(handle);
>   		status = acpi_bus_get_device(handle,&device);
> -		if (present) {
> -			if (ACPI_FAILURE(status) || !device) {
> -				result = container_device_add(&device, handle);
> -				if (!result)
> -					kobject_uevent(&device->dev.kobj,
> -						       KOBJ_ONLINE);
> -				else
> -					printk(KERN_WARNING
> -					       "Failed to add container\n");
> -			}
> -		} else {
> +		if (!present) {
>   			if (ACPI_SUCCESS(status)) {
>   				/* device exist and this is a remove request */
> +				device->flags.eject_pending = 1;
>   				kobject_uevent(&device->dev.kobj, KOBJ_OFFLINE);
> +				return;
>   			}
> +			break;
> +		}
> +

> +		if (!ACPI_FAILURE(status) || device)
> +			break;

The logic is not same as previous logic.
I think the following logic is correct.

		if (!ACPI_FAILURE(status) && device)
			break;
Thanks,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu

> +
> +		result = container_device_add(&device, handle);
> +		if (result) {
> +			printk(KERN_WARNING "Failed to add container\n");
> +			break;
>   		}
> +
> +		kobject_uevent(&device->dev.kobj, KOBJ_ONLINE);
> +		ost_code = ACPI_OST_SC_SUCCESS;
>   		break;
> +
>   	case ACPI_NOTIFY_EJECT_REQUEST:
>   		if (!acpi_bus_get_device(handle,&device)&&  device) {
> +			device->flags.eject_pending = 1;
>   			kobject_uevent(&device->dev.kobj, KOBJ_OFFLINE);
> +			return;
>   		}
>   		break;
> +
>   	default:
> -		break;
> +		/* non-hotplug event; possibly handled by other handler */
> +		return;
>   	}
> +
> +	/* Inform firmware that the hotplug operation has completed */
> +	(void) acpi_evaluate_hotplug_ost(handle, type, ost_code, NULL);
>   	return;
>   }
> 


--
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/