Message ID | 20221021203413.1220137-4-jithu.joseph@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | Changes Requested, archived |
Headers | show |
Series | IFS multi test image support and misc changes | expand |
On 10/21/2022 1:34 PM, Jithu Joseph wrote: > scan_chunks_sanity_check() was returning -ENOMEM if it encounters > an error while copying IFS test image from memory to Secure Memory. > Same as before: s/was returning/returns > Return -EIO in this scenario, as it is more appropriate. > Do the first 3 patches need a 'Fixes' tag? Or is the idea here that the feature isn't truly enabled so everything before removing the BROKEN tag will be considered together?
> Do the first 3 patches need a 'Fixes' tag? Or is the idea here that the > feature isn't truly enabled so everything before removing the BROKEN tag > will be considered together? No point in back porting a "Fix" to a stable release that still marks the driver as BROKEN -Tony
diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/ifs/load.c b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/ifs/load.c index ebaa1d6a2b18..b88db0765311 100644 --- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/ifs/load.c +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/ifs/load.c @@ -157,8 +157,10 @@ static int scan_chunks_sanity_check(struct device *dev) INIT_WORK(&local_work.w, copy_hashes_authenticate_chunks); schedule_work_on(cpu, &local_work.w); wait_for_completion(&ifs_done); - if (ifsd->loading_error) + if (ifsd->loading_error) { + ret = -EIO; goto out; + } package_authenticated[curr_pkg] = 1; } ret = 0;