| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <52D8A672.8070808@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 11:41:38 +0800
From: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>
To: Yijing Wang <wangyijing@...wei.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
CC: linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Dave Airlie <airlied@...hat.com>,
Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ACPI: Fix acpi_evaluate_object() return value check
On 2014-1-17 9:29, Yijing Wang wrote:
> Fix acpi_evaluate_object() return value check,
> shoud acpi_status not int.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yijing Wang <wangyijing@...wei.com>
> ---
>
> v1->v2: Add CC to the related subsystem MAINTAINERS.
>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c | 13 +++++++------
> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/mxm/base.c | 6 +++---
> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c | 13 +++++++------
> drivers/pci/pci-label.c | 6 +++---
> 4 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c
> index dfff090..7ea00e5 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_acpi.c
> @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ static int intel_dsm(acpi_handle handle, int func)
> union acpi_object params[4];
> union acpi_object *obj;
> u32 result;
> - int ret = 0;
The 'ret' is removed, but
> + acpi_status status;
>
> input.count = 4;
> input.pointer = params;
> @@ -50,8 +50,8 @@ static int intel_dsm(acpi_handle handle, int func)
> params[3].package.count = 0;
> params[3].package.elements = NULL;
>
> - ret = acpi_evaluate_object(handle, "_DSM", &input, &output);
> - if (ret) {
> + status = acpi_evaluate_object(handle, "_DSM", &input, &output);
> + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
> DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("failed to evaluate _DSM: %d\n", ret);
> return ret;
you still use it here, so you should -EINVAL or something else here.
> }
> @@ -141,7 +141,8 @@ static void intel_dsm_platform_mux_info(void)
> struct acpi_object_list input;
> union acpi_object params[4];
> union acpi_object *pkg;
> - int i, ret;
> + acpi_status status;
> + int i;
>
> input.count = 4;
> input.pointer = params;
> @@ -156,9 +157,9 @@ static void intel_dsm_platform_mux_info(void)
> params[3].package.count = 0;
> params[3].package.elements = NULL;
>
> - ret = acpi_evaluate_object(intel_dsm_priv.dhandle, "_DSM", &input,
> + acpi_status = acpi_evaluate_object(intel_dsm_priv.dhandle, "_DSM", &input,
> &output);
> - if (ret) {
> + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
> DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("failed to evaluate _DSM: %d\n", ret);
> goto out;
> }
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/mxm/base.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/mxm/base.c
> index 1291204..3920943 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/mxm/base.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/core/subdev/mxm/base.c
> @@ -114,14 +114,14 @@ mxm_shadow_dsm(struct nouveau_mxm *mxm, u8 version)
> struct acpi_buffer retn = { ACPI_ALLOCATE_BUFFER, NULL };
> union acpi_object *obj;
> acpi_handle handle;
> - int ret;
> + acpi_status status;
>
> handle = ACPI_HANDLE(&device->pdev->dev);
> if (!handle)
> return false;
>
> - ret = acpi_evaluate_object(handle, "_DSM", &list, &retn);
> - if (ret) {
> + status = acpi_evaluate_object(handle, "_DSM", &list, &retn);
> + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
> nv_debug(mxm, "DSM MXMS failed: %d\n", ret);
> return false;
> }
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c
> index ba0183f..6f810f2 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c
> @@ -82,7 +82,8 @@ static int nouveau_optimus_dsm(acpi_handle handle, int func, int arg, uint32_t *
> struct acpi_object_list input;
> union acpi_object params[4];
> union acpi_object *obj;
> - int i, err;
> + acpi_status status;
> + int i;
> char args_buff[4];
>
> input.count = 4;
> @@ -101,8 +102,8 @@ static int nouveau_optimus_dsm(acpi_handle handle, int func, int arg, uint32_t *
> args_buff[i] = (arg >> i * 8) & 0xFF;
> params[3].buffer.pointer = args_buff;
>
> - err = acpi_evaluate_object(handle, "_DSM", &input, &output);
> - if (err) {
> + status = acpi_evaluate_object(handle, "_DSM", &input, &output);
> + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
> printk(KERN_INFO "failed to evaluate _DSM: %d\n", err);
> return err;
here too.
> }
> @@ -134,7 +135,7 @@ static int nouveau_dsm(acpi_handle handle, int func, int arg, uint32_t *result)
> struct acpi_object_list input;
> union acpi_object params[4];
> union acpi_object *obj;
> - int err;
> + acpi_status status;
>
> input.count = 4;
> input.pointer = params;
> @@ -148,8 +149,8 @@ static int nouveau_dsm(acpi_handle handle, int func, int arg, uint32_t *result)
> params[3].type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER;
> params[3].integer.value = arg;
>
> - err = acpi_evaluate_object(handle, "_DSM", &input, &output);
> - if (err) {
> + status = acpi_evaluate_object(handle, "_DSM", &input, &output);
> + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
> printk(KERN_INFO "failed to evaluate _DSM: %d\n", err);
> return err;
and here.
> }
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci-label.c b/drivers/pci/pci-label.c
> index d51f45a..3c21f1b 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/pci-label.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/pci-label.c
> @@ -213,7 +213,7 @@ dsm_get_label(acpi_handle handle, int func,
> union acpi_object *obj;
> int len = 0;
>
> - int err;
> + acpi_status status;
>
> input.count = 4;
> input.pointer = params;
> @@ -228,8 +228,8 @@ dsm_get_label(acpi_handle handle, int func,
> params[3].package.count = 0;
> params[3].package.elements = NULL;
>
> - err = acpi_evaluate_object(handle, "_DSM", &input, output);
> - if (err)
> + status = acpi_evaluate_object(handle, "_DSM", &input, output);
> + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
> return -1;
can we return specific error such as -EINVAL instead of hard code?
Thanks
Hanjun
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists