On 13/01/2025 18:25, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
hw_protection_shutdown() will kick off an orderly shutdown and if that takes longer than a configurable amount of time, an emergency shutdown will occur. Recently, hw_protection_reboot() was added for those systems that don't implement a proper shutdown and are better served by rebooting and having the boot firmware worry about doing something about the critical condition. On timeout of the orderly reboot of hw_protection_reboot(), the system would go into shutdown, instead of reboot. This is not a good idea, as going into shutdown was explicitly not asked for. Fix this by always doing an emergency reboot if hw_protection_reboot() is called and the orderly reboot takes too long. Fixes: 79fa723ba84c ("reboot: Introduce thermal_zone_device_critical_reboot()") Signed-off-by: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- kernel/reboot.c | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------- 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/reboot.c b/kernel/reboot.c index 847ac5d17a659981c6765699eac323f5e87f48c1..222b63dfd31020d0e2bc1b1402dbfa82adc71990 100644 --- a/kernel/reboot.c +++ b/kernel/reboot.c @@ -932,48 +932,76 @@ void orderly_reboot(void) } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(orderly_reboot);+static const char *hw_protection_action_str(enum hw_protection_action action)+{ + switch (action) { + case HWPROT_ACT_SHUTDOWN: + return "shutdown"; + case HWPROT_ACT_REBOOT: + return "reboot"; + default: + return "undefined"; + } +} + +static enum hw_protection_action hw_failure_emergency_action;
nit: Do we have a (theoretical) possibility that two emergency restarts get scheduled with different actions? Should the action be allocated (maybe not) for each caller, or should there be a check if an operation with conflicting action is already scheduled?
If this was already considered and thought it is not an issue: Reviewed-by: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@xxxxxxxxx> Yours, -- Matti
