On Thu, 15 Feb 2024, Armin Wolf wrote:
> Am 15.02.24 um 13:31 schrieb Ilpo Järvinen:
>
> > On Wed, 14 Feb 2024, Armin Wolf wrote:
> >
> > > WMI event drivers which do not have no_notify_data set expect
> > > that each WMI event contains valid data. Evaluating _WED however
> > > might return no data, which can cause issues with such drivers.
> > >
> > > Fix this by validating that evaluating _WED did return data.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Armin Wolf <W_Armin@xxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/platform/x86/wmi.c | 11 +++++++++--
> > > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/wmi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/wmi.c
> > > index 34d8f55afaad..8a916887c546 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/platform/x86/wmi.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/wmi.c
> > > @@ -1211,6 +1211,7 @@ static void wmi_notify_driver(struct wmi_block
> > > *wblock)
> > > {
> > > struct wmi_driver *driver = drv_to_wdrv(wblock->dev.dev.driver);
> > > struct acpi_buffer data = { ACPI_ALLOCATE_BUFFER, NULL };
> > > + union acpi_object *obj = NULL;
> > > acpi_status status;
> > >
> > > if (!driver->no_notify_data) {
> > > @@ -1219,12 +1220,18 @@ static void wmi_notify_driver(struct wmi_block
> > > *wblock)
> > > dev_warn(&wblock->dev.dev, "Failed to get event
> > > data\n");
> > > return;
> > > }
> > > +
> > > + obj = data.pointer;
> > > + if (!obj) {
> > > + dev_warn(&wblock->dev.dev, "Event contains not event
> > > data\n");
> > > + return;
> > > + }
> > > }
> > >
> > > if (driver->notify)
> > > - driver->notify(&wblock->dev, data.pointer);
> > > + driver->notify(&wblock->dev, obj);
> > >
> > > - kfree(data.pointer);
> > > + kfree(obj);
> > Hi Armin,
> >
> > While looking into this patch, I failed to connect the mention of
> > no_notify_data in the commit message with the code change that does
> > nothing differently based no_notify_data being set or not, AFAICT.
> >
> > It could be just that you need to explain things better in the commit
> > message, I'm not sure.
>
> Here the _WED ACPI control method is only evaluated if driver->no_notify_data
> is not set.
> So the returned ACPI object should only be validated in this case, as we pass
> NULL otherwise.
Yes, I'm sorry, it seems fine. For some reason I was very confused while
reviewing even if no_notify_data was mentioned right in the previous
context (maybe Iused some older version of the code while trying to figure
things out, I dunno).
--
i.
