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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 17:38:25 +0800 From: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org> To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net> CC: Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@....com>, "grant.likely@...aro.org" <grant.likely@...aro.org>, Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>, Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@....com>, "graeme.gregory@...aro.org" <graeme.gregory@...aro.org>, Sudeep Holla <Sudeep.Holla@....com>, "jcm@...hat.com" <jcm@...hat.com>, Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>, Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@....com>, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Robert Richter <rric@...nel.org>, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, Charles Garcia-Tobin <Charles.Garcia-Tobin@....com>, "phoenix.liyi@...wei.com" <phoenix.liyi@...wei.com>, Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>, Ashwin Chaugule <ashwinc@...eaurora.org>, "suravee.suthikulpanit@....com" <suravee.suthikulpanit@....com>, Mark Langsdorf <mlangsdo@...hat.com>, "wangyijing@...wei.com" <wangyijing@...wei.com>, "linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 09/21] ARM64 / ACPI: Disable ACPI if FADT revision is less than 5.1 On 2015年02月04日 01:20, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 12:45:37PM +0000, Hanjun Guo wrote: >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c >> index afe10b4..b9f64ec 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi.c >> @@ -13,6 +13,8 @@ >> * published by the Free Software Foundation. >> */ >> >> +#define pr_fmt(fmt) "ACPI: " fmt >> + >> #include <linux/acpi.h> >> #include <linux/bootmem.h> >> #include <linux/cpumask.h> >> @@ -49,10 +51,32 @@ void __init __acpi_unmap_table(char *map, unsigned long size) >> early_memunmap(map, size); >> } >> >> +static int __init acpi_parse_fadt(struct acpi_table_header *table) >> +{ >> + struct acpi_table_fadt *fadt = (struct acpi_table_fadt *)table; >> + >> + /* >> + * Revision in table header is the FADT Major revision, and there >> + * is a minor revision of FADT which was introduced by ACPI 5.1, >> + * we only deal with ACPI 5.1 or newer revision to get GIC and SMP >> + * boot protocol configuration data, or we will disable ACPI. >> + */ >> + if (table->revision > 5 || >> + (table->revision == 5 && fadt->minor_revision >= 1)) >> + return 0; >> + >> + pr_warn("Unsupported FADT revision %d.%d, should be 5.1+, will disable ACPI\n", >> + table->revision, fadt->minor_revision); >> + disable_acpi(); >> + >> + return -EINVAL; >> +} >> + >> /* >> * acpi_boot_table_init() called from setup_arch(), always. >> * 1. find RSDP and get its address, and then find XSDT >> * 2. extract all tables and checksums them all >> + * 3. check ACPI FADT revision >> * >> * We can parse ACPI boot-time tables such as MADT after >> * this function is called. >> @@ -64,8 +88,16 @@ void __init acpi_boot_table_init(void) >> return; >> >> /* Initialize the ACPI boot-time table parser. */ >> - if (acpi_table_init()) >> + if (acpi_table_init()) { >> + disable_acpi(); >> + return; >> + } >> + >> + if (acpi_table_parse(ACPI_SIG_FADT, acpi_parse_fadt)) { >> + /* disable ACPI if no FADT is found */ >> disable_acpi(); >> + pr_err("Can't find FADT\n"); >> + } >> } > > It looks fine to call disable_acpi() here but a bit weird to call it > again in acpi_parse_fadt(). I guess that's because acpi_table_parse() > ignores the return value of the handler() call. I think it's better to > fix the core code (can be an additional patch on top of this series). I checked all the code calling acpi_table_parse() and I found that it will be no functional change if we return the value of handler(), but I need Rafael's confirm on it. 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