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:   Sat, 1 Apr 2023 09:36:18 +0800
From:   Jianmin Lv <lvjianmin@...ngson.cn>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        loongarch@...ts.linux.dev,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
        Jiaxun Yang <jiaxun.yang@...goat.com>,
        Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...ngson.cn>,
        loongson-kernel@...ts.loongnix.cn, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/5] irqchip/loongson-eiointc: Fix returned value on
 parsing MADT

Ok, thanks, got it.

On 2023/3/31 下午9:17, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 07:38:56PM +0800, Jianmin Lv wrote:
>> In pch_pic_parse_madt(), a NULL parent pointer will be
>> returned from acpi_get_vec_parent() for second pch-pic domain
>> related to second bridge while calling eiointc_acpi_init() at
>> first time, where the parent of it has not been initialized
>> yet, and will be initialized during second time calling
>> eiointc_acpi_init(). So, it's reasonable to return zero so
>> that failure of acpi_table_parse_madt() will be avoided, or else
>> acpi_cascade_irqdomain_init() will return and initialization of
>> followed pch_msi domain will be skipped.
>>
>> Although it does not matter when pch_msi_parse_madt() returns
>> -EINVAL if no invalid parent is found, it's also reasonable to
>> return zero for that.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jianmin Lv <lvjianmin@...ngson.cn>
>> ---
>>   drivers/irqchip/irq-loongson-eiointc.c | 4 ++--
>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> <formletter>
> 
> This is not the correct way to submit patches for inclusion in the
> stable kernel tree.  Please read:
>      https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html
> for how to do this properly.
> 
> </formletter>
> 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ