linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] ACPI: bus: implement acpi_device

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: <Z1lF0ij99KpbVKQs@kekkonen.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 07:57:06 +0000
From: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>
To: Ricardo Ribalda <ribalda@...omium.org>
Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Robert Moore <robert.moore@...el.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
	Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>,
	linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, acpica-devel@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] ACPI: bus: implement acpi_device_hid when !ACPI

Hi Ricardo,

On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 11:35:35PM +0100, Ricardo Ribalda wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 at 22:01, Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Ricardo,
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 07:56:03PM +0000, Ricardo Ribalda wrote:
> > > Provide an implementation of acpi_device_hid that can be used when
> > > CONFIG_ACPI is not set.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Ricardo Ribalda <ribalda@...omium.org>
> > > ---
> > >  include/acpi/acpi_bus.h | 5 +++++
> > >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h b/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h
> > > index 4f1b3a6f107b..c25914a152ee 100644
> > > --- a/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h
> > > +++ b/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h
> > > @@ -1003,6 +1003,11 @@ static inline int unregister_acpi_bus_type(void *bus) { return 0; }
> > >
> > >  static inline int acpi_wait_for_acpi_ipmi(void) { return 0; }
> > >
> > > +static inline const char *acpi_device_hid(struct acpi_device *device)
> > > +{
> > > +     return "";
> > > +}
> >
> > I wonder if any caller might expect something of a string if provided?
> > Valid _HIDs are either 7 or 8 characters whereas the proper version of the
> > function returns "device" when one cannot be found (dummy_hid in
> > drivers/acpi/scan.c). Unlikely to be a problem perhaps.
> 
> Good point. I changed it to return "device"

When ACPI is disabled, it's unlikely that string would be used anyway, vs.
the case when ACPI is enabled but there's no _HID. So I think an empty
string should be fine. I wonder what others think.

-- 
Sakari Ailus