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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 15 Jan 2014 16:48:55 +0000
From:	"Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@...el.com>
To:	"Lan, Tianyu" <tianyu.lan@...el.com>,
	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
CC:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
	"lenb@...nel.org" <lenb@...nel.org>,
	"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"fcr@...net.com.uy" <fcr@...net.com.uy>,
	"l@...ileo.org" <l@...ileo.org>, "Zheng, Lv" <lv.zheng@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH V2] ACPI/Battery: Add a _BIX quirk for NEC LZ750/LS

If an object does not exist, AE_NOT_FOUND is returned by evaluate_object.

If the package is empty or has insufficient elements, something like AE_AML_OPERAND_VALUE is returned.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lan, Tianyu
> Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2014 7:07 AM
> To: Matthew Garrett
> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki; Dmitry Torokhov; lenb@...nel.org; linux-
> acpi@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; fcr@...net.com.uy;
> l@...ileo.org; Zheng, Lv; Moore, Robert
> 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