linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] ACPI: scan: Introduce a replacement for acpi_bus_get

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: <eb8ba4a3-3889-6fd3-16f1-2b297a05c82a@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 6 Dec 2021 10:04:05 +0100
From:   Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] ACPI: scan: Introduce a replacement for
 acpi_bus_get_device()

Hi,

On 12/3/21 17:34, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> Because acpi_bus_get_device() turned out to be problematic in the past, it has
> been changed to the point that its calling convention doesn't make much sense
> any more (ie. the pointer passed to it as the second argument is cleared on
> errors and it can only return one error value if that pointer is nonzero, so
> there is some duplication of information in there) and it has to make redundant
> checks.
> 
> Moreover, its name suggests some kind of reference counting which really isn't
> the case.
> 
> Thus patch [1/2] introduces a replacement for it, called acpi_fetch_acpi_dev(),
> and makes the code in scan.c use it instead of acpi_bus_get_device() internally.
> 
> Patch [2/2] updates all of the callers of acpi_bus_get_device() within the ACPI
> subsystem to use the replacement (which involves fixing a couple of bugs related
> to that).

Thanks, the series looks good to me:

Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>

for the series.

Regards,

Hans