linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 1/3] ACPI: Using correct irq when uninstalling acpi irq handler

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]

Message-ID: <36DF59CE26D8EE47B0655C516E9CE6402865EDF2@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Sat, 24 Oct 2015 16:04:42 +0000
From:	"Chen, Yu C" <yu.c.chen@...el.com>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
CC:	"lenb@...nel.org" <lenb@...nel.org>,
	"Zhang, Rui" <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
	"Zheng, Lv" <lv.zheng@...el.com>,
	"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/3] ACPI: Using correct irq when uninstalling acpi irq
 handler

Hi, Rafael

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki [mailto:rjw@...ysocki.net]
> Sent: Saturday, October 24, 2015 9:32 PM
> To: Chen, Yu C
> Cc: lenb@...nel.org; Zhang, Rui; Zheng, Lv; linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org;
> linux-pm@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org;
> stable@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ACPI: Using correct irq when uninstalling acpi irq
> handler
> 
> On Thursday, October 22, 2015 08:03:08 PM Chen Yu wrote:
> > Currently when system is trying to uninstall the acpi irq handler, it
> > uses the acpi_gbl_FADT.sci_interrupt directly.
> > But acpi irq handler is actually installed by mapped irq in
> > acpi_os_install_interrupt_handler, so this patch fixes this problem by
> > using the mapped irq returned from acpi_gsi_to_irq.
> >
> > Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org> # 2.6.39+
> > Acked-by: Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@...el.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@...el.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/acpi/osl.c   | 10 +++++++---
> >  include/linux/acpi.h |  3 +++
> >  2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/osl.c b/drivers/acpi/osl.c index
> > 739a4a6..2e9eccf 100644
> > --- a/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> > @@ -81,6 +81,7 @@ static struct workqueue_struct *kacpid_wq;  static
> > struct workqueue_struct *kacpi_notify_wq;  static struct
> > workqueue_struct *kacpi_hotplug_wq;  static bool acpi_os_initialized;
> > +unsigned int acpi_sci_irq = INVALID_ACPI_IRQ;
> >
> >  /*
> >   * This list of permanent mappings is for memory that may be accessed
> > from @@ -856,17 +857,20 @@ acpi_os_install_interrupt_handler(u32 gsi,
> acpi_osd_handler handler,
> >  		acpi_irq_handler = NULL;
> >  		return AE_NOT_ACQUIRED;
> >  	}
> > +	acpi_sci_irq = irq;
> >
> >  	return AE_OK;
> >  }
> >
> > -acpi_status acpi_os_remove_interrupt_handler(u32 irq,
> > acpi_osd_handler handler)
> > +acpi_status acpi_os_remove_interrupt_handler(u32 gsi,
> > +acpi_osd_handler handler)
> >  {
> > -	if (irq != acpi_gbl_FADT.sci_interrupt)
> > +	if ((gsi != acpi_gbl_FADT.sci_interrupt) ||
> > +			IS_INVALID_ACPI_IRQ(acpi_sci_irq))
> 
> The white space doesn't follow the kernel coding style, should be something
> like
> 
> 	if ((gsi != acpi_gbl_FADT.sci_interrupt) ||
> 	    IS_INVALID_ACPI_IRQ(acpi_sci_irq))
> 
> (spaces instead of the second tab).
> 
Ah, got it, thanks.

> Another minor nit is that this probably is the only place you check the
> IS_INVALID_ACPI_IRQ(acpi_sci_irq) thing without logical negation and you
> only pass acpi_sci_irq to IS_INVALID_ACPI_IRQ() AFAICS.
> 
> It would be more straightforward to define something like acpi_sci_irq_valid()
> instead (see below) IMO.
> 
> >  		return AE_BAD_PARAMETER;
> >
> > -	free_irq(irq, acpi_irq);
> > +	free_irq(acpi_sci_irq, acpi_irq);
> >  	acpi_irq_handler = NULL;
> > +	acpi_sci_irq = INVALID_ACPI_IRQ;
> >
> >  	return AE_OK;
> >  }
> > diff --git a/include/linux/acpi.h b/include/linux/acpi.h index
> > 43856d1..bad159c 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/acpi.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/acpi.h
> > @@ -193,6 +193,9 @@ int acpi_ioapic_registered(acpi_handle handle, u32
> > gsi_base);  void acpi_irq_stats_init(void);  extern u32
> > acpi_irq_handled;  extern u32 acpi_irq_not_handled;
> > +extern unsigned int acpi_sci_irq;
> > +#define INVALID_ACPI_IRQ ((unsigned)-1)
> 
> #define INVALID_ACPI_IRQ	((unsigned int)-1)
> 
> > +#define IS_INVALID_ACPI_IRQ(x) unlikely((x) == INVALID_ACPI_IRQ)
> 
> Maybe something like:
> 
> 	static inline bool acpi_sci_irq_valid(void)
> 	{
> 		return acpi_sci_irq != INVALID_ACPI_IRQ;
> 	}
> 
OK, will send out a version 2 with both another two patches modified.

Best Regards,
Yu