linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v3] acpi: indicate to platform when hot remove returns busy

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:   Mon, 3 Jul 2017 17:34:52 +0800
From:   joeyli <jlee@...e.com>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc:     "Lee, Chun-Yi" <joeyli.kernel@...il.com>,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3] acpi: indicate to platform when hot remove
 returns busy

On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 01:49:07PM +0800, joeyli wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
> 
> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 12:13:18AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Wednesday, June 21, 2017 03:45:44 PM Lee, Chun-Yi wrote:
> > > In hotplug logic, it always indicates non-specific failure to
> > > platform through _OST when handing acpi hot-remove event failed. Then
> > > platform terminates the hot-remove process but it can not identify
> > > the reason.
> > > 
[...snip]
> > >  
> > > @@ -423,9 +433,8 @@ void acpi_device_hotplug(struct acpi_device *adev, u32 src)
> > >  		else
> > >  			goto out;
> > >  	}
> > > -	if (!error)
> > > -		ost_code = ACPI_OST_SC_SUCCESS;
> > 
> > I just would do:
> > 
> >     switch (error) {
> >     case 0:
> >         ost_code = ACPI_OST_SC_SUCCESS;
> >         break;
> >     case -EBUSY:
> >         ost_code = ACPI_OST_SC_DEVICE_BUSY;
> >         break;
> >     default:
> >         ost_code = ACPI_OST_SC_NON_SPECIFIC_FAILURE;
> >         break;
> >     }
> >
> 
> Currently the above switch-case works. But if considering
> ACPI_OST_EC_OSPM_INSERTION in the future then it's not enough.
>

After more consideration...

Because Andy and Rafael gave the same suggestion and we didn't
see INSERTION event yet. I will follow the suggestion to send
v4 patch.

Thanks a lot!
Joey Lee