linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/5] acpi/processor: Fix the return value of acpi_processor_ids

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1805191704150.1599@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date:   Sat, 19 May 2018 17:06:29 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Dou Liyang <douly.fnst@...fujitsu.com>
cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] acpi/processor: Fix the return value of
 acpi_processor_ids_walk()

On Tue, 20 Mar 2018, Dou Liyang wrote:

> ACPI driver should make sure all the processor IDs in their ACPI Namespace
> are unique for CPU hotplug. the driver performs a depth-first walk of the
> namespace tree and calls the acpi_processor_ids_walk().
> 
> But, the acpi_processor_ids_walk() will return true if one processor is
> checked, that cause the walk break after walking pass the first processor.
> 
> Repace the value with AE_OK which is the standard acpi_status value.
> 
> Fixes 8c8cb30f49b8 ("acpi/processor: Implement DEVICE operator for processor enumeration")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dou Liyang <douly.fnst@...fujitsu.com>
> ---
>  drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> index 449d86d39965..db5bdb59639c 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> @@ -663,11 +663,11 @@ static acpi_status __init acpi_processor_ids_walk(acpi_handle handle,
>  	}
>  
>  	processor_validated_ids_update(uid);
> -	return true;
> +	return AE_OK;
>  
>  err:
>  	acpi_handle_info(handle, "Invalid processor object\n");
> -	return false;
> +	return AE_OK;

I'm not sure whether this is the right return value here. Rafael?

Thanks,

	tglx