linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] iwlwifi: mvm: adding check if the thermal firmware is running

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: Wed, 5 Jun 2024 17:02:08 -0300
From: Guilherme Giácomo Simões <trintaeoitogc@...il.com>
To: "Wysocki, Rafael J" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
Cc: miriam.rachel.korenblit@...el.com, kvalo@...nel.org, 
	daniel.lezcano@...aro.org, johannes.berg@...el.com, dmantipov@...dex.ru, 
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] iwlwifi: mvm: adding check if the thermal firmware is running

Wysocki, Rafael J <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com> write:
>
> On 6/5/2024 9:51 PM, Guilherme Giacomo Simoes wrote:
> > In the dmesg is showing the message "failed to read out thermal zone"
> > as if the temperature read is failed by don't find the thermal zone.
> >
> > After researching and debugging, I see that this specific error is
> > occurrenced because the thermal try read the temperature when is started,
> > but the firmware is not running yet.
> >
> > For more legibiliti i change the tt.c for return EAGAIN when this was occurrence.
> > After this change, in my computer I compile and install kernel in /boot
> > and in my dmesg the message "failed to read out thermal zone" is not show
> > any more.
> >
> > I would like to thanks for Rafael Wysocki <refael.j.wysocki@...el.com> ,
> > Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org> and Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
> > for your suggestions in my previous patch.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Guilherme Giacomo Simoes <trintaeoitogc@...il.com>
> > ---
> >   drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/tt.c | 10 ++++++++--
> >   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/tt.c b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/tt.c
> > index 8083c4b2ab6b..9aa9e3be39b8 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/tt.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/tt.c
> > @@ -620,8 +620,14 @@ static int iwl_mvm_tzone_get_temp(struct thermal_zone_device *device,
> >
> >       mutex_lock(&mvm->mutex);
> >
> > -     if (!iwl_mvm_firmware_running(mvm) ||
> > -         mvm->fwrt.cur_fw_img != IWL_UCODE_REGULAR) {
> > +     int res = iwl_mvm_firmware_running(mvm);
>
> Why do you need the res variable at all?  You can just call the function
> directly in the if () statement.
>
>
> > +
> > +     if (!res) {
> > +             ret = -EAGAIN;
> > +             goto out;
> > +     }
> > +
> > +     if (mvm->fwrt.cur_fw_img != IWL_UCODE_REGULAR) {
> >               ret = -ENODATA;
> >               goto out;
> >       }

Yes, this makes sense, I only declare the "res" variable because
seeing some files in the linux kernel, I see this standard practice.
But I really don't need this variable. I will send a new patch v4
without this variable.
Thank you for your suggestion on my code.