From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 488452D600; Thu, 15 Feb 2024 12:31:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.10 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708000279; cv=none; b=j9ZIt0iXDzhXhUC9OcW+/1s50j6/72ntkapYKzeCkfX32i0H3B9vvNsotPmatSUNosJQL7U/t1XFSgGAgt4kuPBJUGVe1Mn/UNxkI7/2H2St85LaCN9WuSZUH1tjRxf1W9QGYWzZ+8He+yCNLVGVNtnxftVH1euz7E4KkUxXm1c= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708000279; c=relaxed/simple; bh=pGTBzABlH08Gq8Fd6dQA9/1Tc2CnTZsxXjOd5UVLxC0=; h=From:Date:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=Q+YnrM1lpt2ysGnXNM5bJYoSujdkn+KJwvttBo8fXJuxhXaZDQ2mhT1eRP79RXlngf5XAE71hwFfxyQvdZtimNamxfze8HWcLxW4psW8cijAnEP8VPwJYJ+4UQ6fDc7RfOqA/fUAjFYPvrBwGvZXgXgYMIrKmbkXy0NDzNC+P08= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=dOkAVF7K; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.10 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="dOkAVF7K" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1708000278; x=1739536278; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id: references:mime-version; bh=pGTBzABlH08Gq8Fd6dQA9/1Tc2CnTZsxXjOd5UVLxC0=; b=dOkAVF7KczzXaQ7zCTPQQUVgTnuZJYvhzNa9nRUjzrEiyhOXb2HG6jo9 PxwP1+fLjkehVB3CnkN6wjtB8EzuD8i1OP6yKpHLEiZtL6kpbYqD6/h41 308tDv7PfFGddDRsKDtLZZzcaMQ6Al7r/Rkxouf/Zo4KnDQnREUxbiv1N nDH4WDDcHKCibKlr6JnWX9Ay/wyD2CXP4T0zvolHWso+9KWS5xozYflaH rJtOPcKaznvQI10N/zNVL8jI24a5z8r+l9bzeweaOjt2blqs0OwN1chGb CxoNkL+caWgtb9Oja+tmj/ONpcSd6UtwspI3BD6WBdTVYEEdfOej57Lka g==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10984"; a="19502191" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.06,161,1705392000"; d="scan'208";a="19502191" Received: from orviesa001.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.141]) by orvoesa102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 15 Feb 2024 04:31:17 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.06,161,1705392000"; d="scan'208";a="41008560" Received: from ijarvine-desk1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.246.32.150]) by smtpauth.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 15 Feb 2024 04:31:15 -0800 From: =?UTF-8?q?Ilpo=20J=C3=A4rvinen?= Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 14:31:09 +0200 (EET) To: Armin Wolf cc: corentin.chary@gmail.com, luke@ljones.dev, Hans de Goede , platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] platform/x86: wmi: Check if event data is not NULL In-Reply-To: <20240214070433.2677-3-W_Armin@gmx.de> Message-ID: References: <20240214070433.2677-1-W_Armin@gmx.de> <20240214070433.2677-3-W_Armin@gmx.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII 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 > --- > 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. -- i.