mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Feng Tang <feng.tang@linux.alibaba.com>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
	linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Feng Tang <feng.tang@linux.alibaba.com>
Subject: [PATCH] efi:  remove the rtc-wakeup capability from default value
Date: Wed,  9 Jul 2025 18:35:41 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250709103541.7268-1-feng.tang@linux.alibaba.com> (raw)

The kernel selftest of rtc reported a error on an ARM server:

	RUN           rtc.alarm_alm_set ...
	rtctest.c:262:alarm_alm_set:Alarm time now set to 17:31:36.
	rtctest.c:267:alarm_alm_set:Expected -1 (-1) != rc (-1)
	alarm_alm_set: Test terminated by assertion
		 FAIL  rtc.alarm_alm_set
	not ok 5 rtc.alarm_alm_set

The root cause is, the unerlying EFI firmware doesn't support wakeup
service (get/set alarm), while it doesn't have the efi 'RT_PROP'
table either. The current code logic will claim efi supports these
runtime service capability by default, and let following 'RT_PROP'
table parsing to correct it, if that table exists.

This issue was reproduced on ARM server from another verndor, and not
reproudce on one x86 server (Icelake). All these 3 platforms don't have
'RT_PROP' tables, so they are all claimed to support alarm service,
but x86 server uses real CMOS RTC device instead rtc-efi device, and
passes the test.

So remove the wakeup/alarm capability from default value, and setup
the capability bits according to the 'RT_PROP' table parsing.

Signed-off-by: Feng Tang <feng.tang@linux.alibaba.com>
---
 drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c | 11 +++++++++++
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c
index e57bff702b5f..7cf35376a2f7 100644
--- a/drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c
+++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c
@@ -789,6 +789,17 @@ int __init efi_config_parse_tables(const efi_config_table_t *config_tables,
 		}
 	}
 
+	/*
+	 * After bootup, the runtime_supported_mask was set to be capable of
+	 * all features, which could be kind of too optimistici. In real
+	 * world, many platforms don't support advanced RTC wakeup runtime
+	 * service, while they don't provide RT_PROPERTY table either, which
+	 * led to rtc-wakeup capability being worngly claimed.
+	 *
+	 * So remove the wakeup capbility from default value, and let the
+	 * RT_PROPERTY do the judge.
+	 */
+	efi.runtime_supported_mask &= ~EFI_RT_SUPPORTED_WAKEUP_SERVICES;
 	if (rt_prop != EFI_INVALID_TABLE_ADDR) {
 		efi_rt_properties_table_t *tbl;
 
-- 
2.43.5


             reply	other threads:[~2025-07-09 10:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-07-09 10:35 Feng Tang [this message]
2025-07-09 10:42 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2025-07-09 10:59   ` Feng Tang
2025-07-09 23:33     ` Ard Biesheuvel
2025-07-10  7:24       ` Feng Tang
2025-07-10  7:32         ` Ard Biesheuvel

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20250709103541.7268-1-feng.tang@linux.alibaba.com \
    --to=feng.tang@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=ardb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®