linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] ACPI: APEI: EINJ: warn on invalid argument when explicitly indicated by platform

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]

Date:   Fri, 17 Mar 2023 21:24:25 +0000
From:   "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To:     Shuai Xue <xueshuai@...ux.alibaba.com>
CC:     "baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com" <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
        "benjamin.cheatham@....com" <benjamin.cheatham@....com>,
        "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
        "Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        "james.morse@....com" <james.morse@....com>,
        "jaylu102@....com" <jaylu102@....com>,
        "lenb@...nel.org" <lenb@...nel.org>,
        "linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "rafael@...nel.org" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        "zhuo.song@...ux.alibaba.com" <zhuo.song@...ux.alibaba.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] ACPI: APEI: EINJ: warn on invalid argument when
 explicitly indicated by platform

-	if (val != EINJ_STATUS_SUCCESS)
+	if (val == EINJ_STATUS_FAIL)
 		return -EBUSY;
+	else if (val == EINJ_STATUS_INVAL)
+		return -EINVAL;

The ACPI Specification is really vague here. Documented error codes are

0 = Success (Linux #define EINJ_STATUS_SUCCESS)
1 = Unknown failure (Linux #define EINJ_STATUS_FAIL)
2 = Invalid Access (Linux #define EINJ_STATUS_INVAL)

I don't see how reporting -EBUSY for the "Unknown Failure" case is
actually better.

-Tony