linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 08/25] kernel: Add combined power-off+restart handler call chain API

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: <33d1dfa7-e90e-d174-7375-836c15e7f818@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 29 Nov 2021 14:52:25 +0300
From:   Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
To:     Michał Mirosław <mirq-linux@...e.qmqm.pl>
Cc:     Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Greg Ungerer <gerg@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Joshua Thompson <funaho@...ai.org>,
        Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
        Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
        Greentime Hu <green.hu@...il.com>,
        Vincent Chen <deanbo422@...il.com>,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
        Helge Deller <deller@....de>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        Yoshinori Sato <ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp>,
        Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
        Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
        Santosh Shilimkar <ssantosh@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>, alankao@...estech.com,
        "K . C . Kuen-Chern Lin" <kclin@...estech.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-csky@...r.kernel.org, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
        xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 08/25] kernel: Add combined power-off+restart handler
 call chain API

29.11.2021 03:36, Michał Mirosław пишет:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 12:53:51AM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> 29.11.2021 00:17, Michał Mirosław пишет:
>>>> I'm having trouble with parsing this comment. Could you please try to
>>>> rephrase it? I don't see how you could check whether power-off handler
>>>> is available if you'll mix all handlers together.
>>> If notify_call_chain() would be fixed to return NOTIFY_OK if any call
>>> returned NOTIFY_OK, then this would be a clear way to gather the
>>> answer if any of the handlers will attempt the final action (reboot or
>>> power off).
>> Could you please show a code snippet that implements your suggestion?
> 
> A rough idea is this:
> 
>  static int notifier_call_chain(struct notifier_block **nl,
>  			       unsigned long val, void *v,
>  			       int nr_to_call, int *nr_calls)
>  {
> -	int ret = NOTIFY_DONE;
> +	int ret, result = NOTIFY_DONE;
>  	struct notifier_block *nb, *next_nb;
>  
>  	nb = rcu_dereference_raw(*nl);
>  
>  	while (nb && nr_to_call) {
> ...
>  		ret = nb->notifier_call(nb, val, v);
> +
> +		/* Assuming NOTIFY_STOP-carrying return is always greater than non-stopping one. */
> +		if (result < ret)
> +			result = ret;
> ... 
>  	}
> -	return ret;
> +	return result;
>  }
> 
> Then:
> 
> bool prepare_reboot()
> {
> 	int ret = xx_notifier_call_chain(&shutdown_notifier, PREPARE_REBOOT, ...);
> 	return ret == NOTIFY_OK;
> }
> 
> And the return value would signify whether the reboot will be attempted
> when calling the chain for the REBOOT action. (Analogously for powering off.)

If you started to execute call chain, then you began the power-off /
restart sequence, this is a point of no return. Sorry, I still don't
understand what you're trying to achieve.

The approach of having separate call chains is simple and intuitive, I
don't see reasons to change it.