[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <80bc19ce-7111-4a5d-b875-2712bdf2bb72@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 21:27:36 +0100
From: Armin Wolf <W_Armin@....de>
To: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: corentin.chary@...il.com, luke@...nes.dev,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>, platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] platform/x86: wmi: Check if event data is not NULL
Am 15.02.24 um 13:31 schrieb Ilpo Järvinen:
> On Wed, 14 Feb 2024, Armin Wolf wrote:
>
>> WMI event drivers which do not have no_notify_data set expect
>> that each WMI event contains valid data. Evaluating _WED however
>> might return no data, which can cause issues with such drivers.
>>
>> Fix this by validating that evaluating _WED did return data.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Armin Wolf <W_Armin@....de>
>> ---
>> drivers/platform/x86/wmi.c | 11 +++++++++--
>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/wmi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/wmi.c
>> index 34d8f55afaad..8a916887c546 100644
>> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/wmi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/wmi.c
>> @@ -1211,6 +1211,7 @@ static void wmi_notify_driver(struct wmi_block *wblock)
>> {
>> struct wmi_driver *driver = drv_to_wdrv(wblock->dev.dev.driver);
>> struct acpi_buffer data = { ACPI_ALLOCATE_BUFFER, NULL };
>> + union acpi_object *obj = NULL;
>> acpi_status status;
>>
>> if (!driver->no_notify_data) {
>> @@ -1219,12 +1220,18 @@ static void wmi_notify_driver(struct wmi_block *wblock)
>> dev_warn(&wblock->dev.dev, "Failed to get event data\n");
>> return;
>> }
>> +
>> + obj = data.pointer;
>> + if (!obj) {
>> + dev_warn(&wblock->dev.dev, "Event contains not event data\n");
>> + return;
>> + }
>> }
>>
>> if (driver->notify)
>> - driver->notify(&wblock->dev, data.pointer);
>> + driver->notify(&wblock->dev, obj);
>>
>> - kfree(data.pointer);
>> + kfree(obj);
> Hi Armin,
>
> While looking into this patch, I failed to connect the mention of
> no_notify_data in the commit message with the code change that does
> nothing differently based no_notify_data being set or not, AFAICT.
>
> It could be just that you need to explain things better in the commit
> message, I'm not sure.
Here the _WED ACPI control method is only evaluated if driver->no_notify_data is not set.
So the returned ACPI object should only be validated in this case, as we pass NULL otherwise.
Armin Wolf
Powered by blists - more mailing lists