Message ID | 2741433.mvXUDI8C0e@kreacher (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | Superseded, archived |
Headers | show |
Series | [v1] ACPI: scan: Avoid enumerating devices with clearly invalid _STA values | expand |
On Fri, 2024-04-26 at 18:56 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> > > The return value of _STA with the "present" bit unset and the > "enabled" > bit set is clearly invalid as per the ACPI specification, Section > 6.3.7 > "_STA (Device Status)", so make the ACPI device enumeration code > disregard devices with such _STA return values. > > Also, because this implies that status.enabled will only be set if > status.present is set too, acpi_device_is_enabled() can be modified > to simply return the value of the former. > > Link: > https://uefi.org/specs/ACPI/6.5/06_Device_Configuration.html#sta-device-status > Link: > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/88179311a503493099028c12ca37d430@huawei.com/ > Suggested-by: Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@huawei.com> > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> > --- > drivers/acpi/bus.c | 11 +++++++++++ > drivers/acpi/scan.c | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > Index: linux-pm/drivers/acpi/bus.c > =================================================================== > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/bus.c > +++ linux-pm/drivers/acpi/bus.c > @@ -112,6 +112,17 @@ int acpi_bus_get_status(struct acpi_devi > if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) > return -ENODEV; > > + if (!device->status.present && device->status.enabled) { > + pr_info(FW_BUG "Device [%s] status [%08x]: not > present and enabled\n", > + device->pnp.bus_id, (u32)sta); > + device->status.enabled = 0; > + /* > + * The status is clearly invalid, so clear the > enabled bit as > + * well to avoid attempting to use the device. > + */ seems that this comment is for the line above? thanks, rui > + device->status.functional = 0; > + } > + > acpi_set_device_status(device, sta); > > if (device->status.functional && !device->status.present) { > Index: linux-pm/drivers/acpi/scan.c > =================================================================== > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/scan.c > +++ linux-pm/drivers/acpi/scan.c > @@ -1962,7 +1962,7 @@ bool acpi_device_is_present(const struct > > bool acpi_device_is_enabled(const struct acpi_device *adev) > { > - return adev->status.present && adev->status.enabled; > + return adev->status.enabled; > } > > static bool acpi_scan_handler_matching(struct acpi_scan_handler > *handler, > > > >
On Fri, 26 Apr 2024 18:56:21 +0200 "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> > > The return value of _STA with the "present" bit unset and the "enabled" > bit set is clearly invalid as per the ACPI specification, Section 6.3.7 > "_STA (Device Status)", so make the ACPI device enumeration code > disregard devices with such _STA return values. > > Also, because this implies that status.enabled will only be set if > status.present is set too, acpi_device_is_enabled() can be modified > to simply return the value of the former. > > Link: https://uefi.org/specs/ACPI/6.5/06_Device_Configuration.html#sta-device-status > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/88179311a503493099028c12ca37d430@huawei.com/ > Suggested-by: Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@huawei.com> > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Seems a sensible tidying up. Hopefully nothing was relying on this looser behavior. One trivial thing inline. Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com> > --- > drivers/acpi/bus.c | 11 +++++++++++ > drivers/acpi/scan.c | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > Index: linux-pm/drivers/acpi/bus.c > =================================================================== > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/bus.c > +++ linux-pm/drivers/acpi/bus.c > @@ -112,6 +112,17 @@ int acpi_bus_get_status(struct acpi_devi > if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) > return -ENODEV; > > + if (!device->status.present && device->status.enabled) { > + pr_info(FW_BUG "Device [%s] status [%08x]: not present and enabled\n", > + device->pnp.bus_id, (u32)sta); > + device->status.enabled = 0; > + /* > + * The status is clearly invalid, so clear the enabled bit as > + * well to avoid attempting to use the device. > + */ Comment seems to be in a slightly odd place. Perhaps one line earlier makes more sense? Or was the intent to mention functional here? > + device->status.functional = 0; > + } > + > acpi_set_device_status(device, sta); > > if (device->status.functional && !device->status.present) { > Index: linux-pm/drivers/acpi/scan.c > =================================================================== > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/scan.c > +++ linux-pm/drivers/acpi/scan.c > @@ -1962,7 +1962,7 @@ bool acpi_device_is_present(const struct > > bool acpi_device_is_enabled(const struct acpi_device *adev) > { > - return adev->status.present && adev->status.enabled; > + return adev->status.enabled; > } > > static bool acpi_scan_handler_matching(struct acpi_scan_handler *handler, > > >
On Sun, Apr 28, 2024 at 6:17 AM Zhang, Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com> wrote: > > On Fri, 2024-04-26 at 18:56 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> > > > > The return value of _STA with the "present" bit unset and the > > "enabled" > > bit set is clearly invalid as per the ACPI specification, Section > > 6.3.7 > > "_STA (Device Status)", so make the ACPI device enumeration code > > disregard devices with such _STA return values. > > > > Also, because this implies that status.enabled will only be set if > > status.present is set too, acpi_device_is_enabled() can be modified > > to simply return the value of the former. > > > > Link: > > https://uefi.org/specs/ACPI/6.5/06_Device_Configuration.html#sta-device-status > > Link: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/88179311a503493099028c12ca37d430@huawei.com/ > > Suggested-by: Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@huawei.com> > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> > > --- > > drivers/acpi/bus.c | 11 +++++++++++ > > drivers/acpi/scan.c | 2 +- > > 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > Index: linux-pm/drivers/acpi/bus.c > > =================================================================== > > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/bus.c > > +++ linux-pm/drivers/acpi/bus.c > > @@ -112,6 +112,17 @@ int acpi_bus_get_status(struct acpi_devi > > if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) > > return -ENODEV; > > > > + if (!device->status.present && device->status.enabled) { > > + pr_info(FW_BUG "Device [%s] status [%08x]: not > > present and enabled\n", > > + device->pnp.bus_id, (u32)sta); > > + device->status.enabled = 0; > > + /* > > + * The status is clearly invalid, so clear the > > enabled bit as > > + * well to avoid attempting to use the device. > > + */ > > seems that this comment is for the line above? No, I meant "functional" and wrote "enabled". Not sure why really. > > + device->status.functional = 0; > > + } > > + > > acpi_set_device_status(device, sta); > > > > if (device->status.functional && !device->status.present) { > > Index: linux-pm/drivers/acpi/scan.c > > =================================================================== > > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/scan.c > > +++ linux-pm/drivers/acpi/scan.c > > @@ -1962,7 +1962,7 @@ bool acpi_device_is_present(const struct > > > > bool acpi_device_is_enabled(const struct acpi_device *adev) > > { > > - return adev->status.present && adev->status.enabled; > > + return adev->status.enabled; > > } > > > > static bool acpi_scan_handler_matching(struct acpi_scan_handler > > *handler, > > > > > > > > >
On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 10:29 AM Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com> wrote: > > On Fri, 26 Apr 2024 18:56:21 +0200 > "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote: > > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> > > > > The return value of _STA with the "present" bit unset and the "enabled" > > bit set is clearly invalid as per the ACPI specification, Section 6.3.7 > > "_STA (Device Status)", so make the ACPI device enumeration code > > disregard devices with such _STA return values. > > > > Also, because this implies that status.enabled will only be set if > > status.present is set too, acpi_device_is_enabled() can be modified > > to simply return the value of the former. > > > > Link: https://uefi.org/specs/ACPI/6.5/06_Device_Configuration.html#sta-device-status > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/88179311a503493099028c12ca37d430@huawei.com/ > > Suggested-by: Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@huawei.com> > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> > Seems a sensible tidying up. Hopefully nothing was relying on > this looser behavior. One trivial thing inline. > > Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com> Thanks! > > --- > > drivers/acpi/bus.c | 11 +++++++++++ > > drivers/acpi/scan.c | 2 +- > > 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > Index: linux-pm/drivers/acpi/bus.c > > =================================================================== > > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/bus.c > > +++ linux-pm/drivers/acpi/bus.c > > @@ -112,6 +112,17 @@ int acpi_bus_get_status(struct acpi_devi > > if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) > > return -ENODEV; > > > > + if (!device->status.present && device->status.enabled) { > > + pr_info(FW_BUG "Device [%s] status [%08x]: not present and enabled\n", > > + device->pnp.bus_id, (u32)sta); > > + device->status.enabled = 0; > > + /* > > + * The status is clearly invalid, so clear the enabled bit as > > + * well to avoid attempting to use the device. > > + */ > > Comment seems to be in a slightly odd place. Perhaps one line earlier makes > more sense? Or was the intent to mention functional here? Rui has noticed this already. I thought "functional" and wrote "enabled". Oh well, I'll send a v2. > > + device->status.functional = 0; > > + } > > + > > acpi_set_device_status(device, sta); > > > > if (device->status.functional && !device->status.present) { > > Index: linux-pm/drivers/acpi/scan.c > > =================================================================== > > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/scan.c > > +++ linux-pm/drivers/acpi/scan.c > > @@ -1962,7 +1962,7 @@ bool acpi_device_is_present(const struct > > > > bool acpi_device_is_enabled(const struct acpi_device *adev) > > { > > - return adev->status.present && adev->status.enabled; > > + return adev->status.enabled; > > } > > > > static bool acpi_scan_handler_matching(struct acpi_scan_handler *handler, > > > > > > > >
Index: linux-pm/drivers/acpi/bus.c =================================================================== --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/bus.c +++ linux-pm/drivers/acpi/bus.c @@ -112,6 +112,17 @@ int acpi_bus_get_status(struct acpi_devi if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) return -ENODEV; + if (!device->status.present && device->status.enabled) { + pr_info(FW_BUG "Device [%s] status [%08x]: not present and enabled\n", + device->pnp.bus_id, (u32)sta); + device->status.enabled = 0; + /* + * The status is clearly invalid, so clear the enabled bit as + * well to avoid attempting to use the device. + */ + device->status.functional = 0; + } + acpi_set_device_status(device, sta); if (device->status.functional && !device->status.present) { Index: linux-pm/drivers/acpi/scan.c =================================================================== --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/scan.c +++ linux-pm/drivers/acpi/scan.c @@ -1962,7 +1962,7 @@ bool acpi_device_is_present(const struct bool acpi_device_is_enabled(const struct acpi_device *adev) { - return adev->status.present && adev->status.enabled; + return adev->status.enabled; } static bool acpi_scan_handler_matching(struct acpi_scan_handler *handler,