linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2] ACPI/Battery: Add a

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]

Message-ID: <52D6A3FF.8070100@intel.com>
Date:	Wed, 15 Jan 2014 23:06:39 +0800
From:	Lan Tianyu <tianyu.lan@...el.com>
To:	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
CC:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>, lenb@...nel.org,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	fcr@...net.com.uy, l@...ileo.org, "Zheng, Lv" <lv.zheng@...el.com>,
	robert.moore@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] ACPI/Battery: Add a _BIX quirk for NEC LZ750/LS

On 01/15/2014 10:47 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 10:42:31PM +0800, Lan Tianyu wrote:
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/battery.c b/drivers/acpi/battery.c
>> index fbf1ace..e98fa83 100644
>> --- a/drivers/acpi/battery.c
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/battery.c
>> @@ -770,7 +770,7 @@ static int acpi_battery_add(struct acpi_device *device)
>>          device->driver_data = battery;
>>          mutex_init(&battery->lock);
>>          mutex_init(&battery->sysfs_lock);
>> -       if (acpi_has_method(battery->device->handle, "_BIX"))
>> +       if (acpi_evaluate_object(device->handle, "_BIX", NULL, &buffer);)
>>                  set_bit(ACPI_BATTERY_XINFO_PRESENT, &battery->flags);
>
> Doesn't acpi_evaluate_object() return 0 on success? I think:
>
> if (ACPI_SUCESS(acpi_evaluate_object(device->handle, "_BIX", NULL,
> &buffer))
>

Yes, Sorry for oops.

> But maybe we should check for existence first and give an FW_BUG message
> to indicate an invalid _BIX?

Yes, this is a good idea.

Another point, the acpi_evaluate_object should return different error 
code for these two cases(no _BIX and wrong size.). I wonder whether we 
can use the error code to determine it belong which case?
>


-- 
Best Regards
Tianyu Lan
--
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/