All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Eugene Shalygin" <eugene.shalygin@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hwmon: (asus-ec-sensors) fix EC read intervals
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2026 11:02:05 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260712110205.A3CC61F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260712105422.920360-1-eugene.shalygin@gmail.com>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] Unconditional advancement of the update timestamp masks hardware read errors, causing silent propagation of stale or uninitialized data to userspace.
--

--- Patch [1]: [PATCH] hwmon: (asus-ec-sensors) fix EC read intervals ---
commit 6080114048f396c35a55a9a09a1833289acbf3be
Author: Eugene Shalygin <eugene.shalygin@gmail.com>

hwmon: (asus-ec-sensors) fix EC read intervals

This commit updates the driver to take INITIAL_JIFFIES into account when
setting up the next update time. It changes the last_updated tracker to a
next_update timestamp and advances it by HZ prior to performing hardware
sensor reads.

> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/asus-ec-sensors.c b/drivers/hwmon/asus-ec-sensors.c
> index 29a23484cbe7b..4746c3718664b 100644
> --- a/drivers/hwmon/asus-ec-sensors.c
> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/asus-ec-sensors.c

[ ... ]

> @@ -1278,13 +1278,12 @@ static int get_cached_value_or_update(const struct device *dev,
>  				      int sensor_index,
>  				      struct ec_sensors_data *state, s32 *value)
>  {
> -	if (time_after(jiffies, state->last_updated + HZ)) {
> +	if (time_after64(get_jiffies_64(), state->next_update)) {
> +		state->next_update = get_jiffies_64() + HZ;
>  		if (update_ec_sensors(dev, state)) {

[Severity: High]
Does unconditional advancement of state->next_update before verifying the
hardware read succeeded cause stale data to be reported to userspace?

If update_ec_sensors() fails (for example, due to ACPI mutex contention
returning -EBUSY), the timestamp remains advanced. Any subsequent attribute
reads within the 1-second timeout window will bypass the update check.

These subsequent reads will successfully return uninitialized (zero) or stale
cached_value data with a return code of 0, potentially disrupting thermal
management policies.

>  			dev_err(dev, "update_ec_sensors() failure\n");
>  			return -EIO;
>  		}
> -
> -		state->last_updated = jiffies;
>  	}
>  
>  	*value = state->sensors[sensor_index].cached_value;

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260712105422.920360-1-eugene.shalygin@gmail.com?part=1

      reply	other threads:[~2026-07-12 11:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-12 10:54 [PATCH] hwmon: (asus-ec-sensors) fix EC read intervals Eugene Shalygin
2026-07-12 11:02 ` sashiko-bot [this message]

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=20260712110205.A3CC61F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=eugene.shalygin@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.