linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 13/22] ACPI: platform_profile: Require handlers to support balanced profile

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: <40b52d41-e3d6-4223-b9e9-0db6b2a19265@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2024 21:39:05 +0100
From: Armin Wolf <W_Armin@....de>
To: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>,
 Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
 Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
 Maximilian Luz <luzmaximilian@...il.com>, Lee Chun-Yi <jlee@...e.com>,
 Shyam Sundar S K <Shyam-sundar.S-k@....com>,
 Corentin Chary <corentin.chary@...il.com>, "Luke D . Jones"
 <luke@...nes.dev>, Ike Panhc <ike.pan@...onical.com>,
 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br>,
 Alexis Belmonte <alexbelm48@...il.com>,
 Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
 Ai Chao <aichao@...inos.cn>, Gergo Koteles <soyer@....hu>,
 open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 "open list:ACPI" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
 "open list:MICROSOFT SURFACE PLATFORM PROFILE DRIVER"
 <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
 "open list:THINKPAD ACPI EXTRAS DRIVER"
 <ibm-acpi-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
 Mark Pearson <mpearson-lenovo@...ebb.ca>,
 Matthew Schwartz <matthew.schwartz@...ux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 13/22] ACPI: platform_profile: Require handlers to
 support balanced profile

Am 31.10.24 um 05:09 schrieb Mario Limonciello:

> As support for multiple simultaneous platform handers is introduced it's
> important they have at least the balanced profile in common.
>
> This will be used as a fallback in case setting the profile across one of the
> handlers happens to fail.

Do we actually need this patch anymore now that we have the "custom" platform profile?
If setting the platform profile fails for some handlers, then we simply display the current
platform profile as "custom".

Thanks,
Armin Wolf

> Tested-by: Matthew Schwartz <matthew.schwartz@...ux.dev>
> Suggested-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>
> ---
>   drivers/acpi/platform_profile.c | 4 ++++
>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/platform_profile.c b/drivers/acpi/platform_profile.c
> index b70ceb11947d0..57c66d7dbf827 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/platform_profile.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/platform_profile.c
> @@ -164,6 +164,10 @@ int platform_profile_register(struct platform_profile_handler *pprof)
>   		pr_err("platform_profile: handler is invalid\n");
>   		return -EINVAL;
>   	}
> +	if (!test_bit(PLATFORM_PROFILE_BALANCED, pprof->choices)) {
> +		pr_err("platform_profile: handler does not support balanced profile\n");
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +	}
>   	if (!pprof->dev) {
>   		pr_err("platform_profile: handler device is not set\n");
>   		return -EINVAL;