Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1631478
| From | Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH] ACPICA: Tables: Fix regression introduced by a too early mechanism enabling |
| Date | 2017-04-26 16:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tAvXr-3oc-13@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <tAkpj-43b-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <tAnnb-6ff-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <tAnwR-6iH-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 10:15 PM, Zheng, Lv <lv.zheng@intel.com> wrote: > Hi, > >> From: Dan Williams [mailto:dan.j.williams@intel.com] >> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] ACPICA: Tables: Fix regression introduced by a too early mechanism enabling >> >> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@intel.com> wrote: >> > In the Linux kernel side, acpi_get_table() hasn't been fully balanced by >> > acpi_put_table() invocations. So it is not a good timing to report errors. >> > The strict balanced validation count check should only be enabled after >> > confirming that all kernel side invocations are safe. >> >> We've been living with this bug for 7 years, let's just go fix all >> acpi_get_table() invocations to make sure they have a corresponding >> acpi_put_table(). > > We knew that, you should have already seen a series internally or > externally from me achieving this. > It's done several years ago. But it takes long time to make the > ACPICA part upstreamed. > > Now my plan is: > 1. introduce the APIs but allow old usage models in order not to > change old ACPICA behavior and its users. > 2. fix all users > 3. disallow old usage models. > It's just my mistake to leak the final stage approach to the ACPICA > upstream from my local repo. > Now we can try to jump to the final step, but as far as I know, > not only Linux, ACPICA itself also contains several broken cases. > > Bottom line of Linux kernel is we shouldn't break any running system. > So IMO, we will need this commit during this special period. > > I didn't say the final step is wrong or is not required. > We can do both in parallel. > > So could you please help to confirm if it's working. > And I would like to suggest linux to take this first step fix along > with other final step fixes during this period. I just think "this period" is very short and we can skip the band-aid and go straight to auditing the 48 call sites of acpi_get_table.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[RFC PATCH] ACPICA: Tables: Fix regression introduced by a too early mechanism enabling Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@intel.com> - 2017-04-26 04:00 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH] ACPICA: Tables: Fix regression introduced by a too early mechanism enabling Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> - 2017-04-26 07:10 +0200
RE: [RFC PATCH] ACPICA: Tables: Fix regression introduced by a too early mechanism enabling "Zheng, Lv" <lv.zheng@intel.com> - 2017-04-26 07:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH] ACPICA: Tables: Fix regression introduced by a too early mechanism enabling Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> - 2017-04-26 16:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH] ACPICA: Tables: Fix regression introduced by a too early mechanism enabling Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> - 2017-04-26 17:40 +0200
csiph-web