All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH v2] platform/chrome: sensorhub: Fix dropped timestamp events and log spam
@ 2026-07-15  2:44 Tzung-Bi Shih
  2026-07-15  7:15 ` Tomasz Figa
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Tzung-Bi Shih @ 2026-07-15  2:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Benson Leung; +Cc: tzungbi, Bryam Vargas, chrome-platform, tfiga, suleiman

Commit 833740a2333c ("platform/chrome: sensorhub: Bound the EC-reported
sensor number") evaluated the `sensor_num` against the bounds limit even
for timestamp events.  A timestamp event typically has a `sensor_num` of
0xff [1], causing the driver to flag it as invalid and skip to the next
event.

As a result, we'd see a flooding of "Invalid sensor number 255 from EC"
warning logs and these timestamp events were being dropped.

Move the bounds-check into cros_ec_sensor_ring_process_event() and
evaluate it only after standalone timestamp events have already been
processed and returned early.

[1] https://crrev.com/219ca6ef82ba266da788b673ee4ad50bd3ea1285/common/motion_sense_fifo.c#427

Fixes: 833740a2333c ("platform/chrome: sensorhub: Bound the EC-reported sensor number")
Signed-off-by: Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@kernel.org>
---
Bryam: sorry for reverting the decision (moving back the check to
cros_ec_sensor_ring_process_event()).  I realized we need to prevent
dropping timestamp events and flooding the logs.
---
v2:
- Move the check to cros_ec_sensor_ring_process_event().
- Return earlier for standalone timestamp events.

v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260714065202.3248017-1-tzungbi@kernel.org
---
 .../platform/chrome/cros_ec_sensorhub_ring.c  | 27 ++++++++++---------
 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_sensorhub_ring.c b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_sensorhub_ring.c
index 92941924c347..d92b60213720 100644
--- a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_sensorhub_ring.c
+++ b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_sensorhub_ring.c
@@ -475,6 +475,21 @@ cros_ec_sensor_ring_process_event(struct cros_ec_sensorhub *sensorhub,
 						  fifo_timestamp,
 						  *current_timestamp,
 						  now);
+
+		/*
+		 * A standalone timestamp event typically has a sensor_num of
+		 * 0xff.  Return early here to prevent it from hitting the
+		 * bounds check below and spamming the logs.
+		 */
+		return false;
+	}
+
+	/* Skip event if sensor_num from EC is out of bounds. */
+	if (in->sensor_num >= sensorhub->sensor_num) {
+		dev_warn_ratelimited(sensorhub->dev,
+				     "Invalid sensor number %u from EC\n",
+				     in->sensor_num);
+		return false;
 	}
 
 	if (in->flags & MOTIONSENSE_SENSOR_FLAG_ODR) {
@@ -502,10 +517,6 @@ cros_ec_sensor_ring_process_event(struct cros_ec_sensorhub *sensorhub,
 		return true;
 	}
 
-	if (in->flags & MOTIONSENSE_SENSOR_FLAG_TIMESTAMP)
-		/* If we just have a timestamp, skip this entry. */
-		return false;
-
 	/* Regular sample */
 	out->sensor_id = in->sensor_num;
 	trace_cros_ec_sensorhub_data(in->sensor_num,
@@ -897,14 +908,6 @@ static void cros_ec_sensorhub_ring_handler(struct cros_ec_sensorhub *sensorhub)
 
 		for (in = sensorhub->resp->fifo_read.data, j = 0;
 		     j < number_data; j++, in++) {
-			/* Skip event if sensor_num from EC is out of bounds. */
-			if (in->sensor_num >= sensorhub->sensor_num) {
-				dev_warn_ratelimited(sensorhub->dev,
-						     "Invalid sensor number %u from EC\n",
-						     in->sensor_num);
-				continue;
-			}
-
 			if (cros_ec_sensor_ring_process_event(
 						sensorhub, fifo_info,
 						fifo_timestamp,
-- 
2.55.0.229.g6434b31f56-goog


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH v2] platform/chrome: sensorhub: Fix dropped timestamp events and log spam
  2026-07-15  2:44 [PATCH v2] platform/chrome: sensorhub: Fix dropped timestamp events and log spam Tzung-Bi Shih
@ 2026-07-15  7:15 ` Tomasz Figa
  2026-07-15  9:28   ` Tzung-Bi Shih
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Tomasz Figa @ 2026-07-15  7:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Tzung-Bi Shih; +Cc: Benson Leung, Bryam Vargas, chrome-platform, suleiman

On Wed, Jul 15, 2026 at 11:45 AM Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Commit 833740a2333c ("platform/chrome: sensorhub: Bound the EC-reported
> sensor number") evaluated the `sensor_num` against the bounds limit even
> for timestamp events.  A timestamp event typically has a `sensor_num` of
> 0xff [1], causing the driver to flag it as invalid and skip to the next
> event.
>
> As a result, we'd see a flooding of "Invalid sensor number 255 from EC"
> warning logs and these timestamp events were being dropped.
>
> Move the bounds-check into cros_ec_sensor_ring_process_event() and
> evaluate it only after standalone timestamp events have already been
> processed and returned early.
>
> [1] https://crrev.com/219ca6ef82ba266da788b673ee4ad50bd3ea1285/common/motion_sense_fifo.c#427
>
> Fixes: 833740a2333c ("platform/chrome: sensorhub: Bound the EC-reported sensor number")
> Signed-off-by: Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@kernel.org>
> ---
> Bryam: sorry for reverting the decision (moving back the check to
> cros_ec_sensor_ring_process_event()).  I realized we need to prevent
> dropping timestamp events and flooding the logs.
> ---
> v2:
> - Move the check to cros_ec_sensor_ring_process_event().
> - Return earlier for standalone timestamp events.
>
> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260714065202.3248017-1-tzungbi@kernel.org
> ---
>  .../platform/chrome/cros_ec_sensorhub_ring.c  | 27 ++++++++++---------
>  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_sensorhub_ring.c b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_sensorhub_ring.c
> index 92941924c347..d92b60213720 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_sensorhub_ring.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_sensorhub_ring.c
> @@ -475,6 +475,21 @@ cros_ec_sensor_ring_process_event(struct cros_ec_sensorhub *sensorhub,
>                                                   fifo_timestamp,
>                                                   *current_timestamp,
>                                                   now);
> +
> +               /*
> +                * A standalone timestamp event typically has a sensor_num of
> +                * 0xff.  Return early here to prevent it from hitting the
> +                * bounds check below and spamming the logs.
> +                */
> +               return false;
> +       }
> +
> +       /* Skip event if sensor_num from EC is out of bounds. */
> +       if (in->sensor_num >= sensorhub->sensor_num) {
> +               dev_warn_ratelimited(sensorhub->dev,
> +                                    "Invalid sensor number %u from EC\n",
> +                                    in->sensor_num);
> +               return false;
>         }
>
>         if (in->flags & MOTIONSENSE_SENSOR_FLAG_ODR) {
> @@ -502,10 +517,6 @@ cros_ec_sensor_ring_process_event(struct cros_ec_sensorhub *sensorhub,
>                 return true;
>         }
>
> -       if (in->flags & MOTIONSENSE_SENSOR_FLAG_TIMESTAMP)
> -               /* If we just have a timestamp, skip this entry. */
> -               return false;
> -

Isn't this still needed for the case of
MOTIONSENSE_SENSOR_FLAG_TIMESTAMP and (MOTIONSENSE_SENSOR_FLAG_ODR
and/or MOTIONSENSE_SENSOR_FLAG_FLUSH)?

>         /* Regular sample */
>         out->sensor_id = in->sensor_num;
>         trace_cros_ec_sensorhub_data(in->sensor_num,
> @@ -897,14 +908,6 @@ static void cros_ec_sensorhub_ring_handler(struct cros_ec_sensorhub *sensorhub)
>
>                 for (in = sensorhub->resp->fifo_read.data, j = 0;
>                      j < number_data; j++, in++) {
> -                       /* Skip event if sensor_num from EC is out of bounds. */
> -                       if (in->sensor_num >= sensorhub->sensor_num) {
> -                               dev_warn_ratelimited(sensorhub->dev,
> -                                                    "Invalid sensor number %u from EC\n",
> -                                                    in->sensor_num);
> -                               continue;
> -                       }
> -
>                         if (cros_ec_sensor_ring_process_event(
>                                                 sensorhub, fifo_info,
>                                                 fifo_timestamp,
> --
> 2.55.0.229.g6434b31f56-goog
>

Best,
Tomasz

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH v2] platform/chrome: sensorhub: Fix dropped timestamp events and log spam
  2026-07-15  7:15 ` Tomasz Figa
@ 2026-07-15  9:28   ` Tzung-Bi Shih
  2026-07-15  9:30     ` Tomasz Figa
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Tzung-Bi Shih @ 2026-07-15  9:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Tomasz Figa; +Cc: Benson Leung, Bryam Vargas, chrome-platform, suleiman

On Wed, Jul 15, 2026 at 04:15:22PM +0900, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2026 at 11:45 AM Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Commit 833740a2333c ("platform/chrome: sensorhub: Bound the EC-reported
> > sensor number") evaluated the `sensor_num` against the bounds limit even
> > for timestamp events.  A timestamp event typically has a `sensor_num` of
> > 0xff [1], causing the driver to flag it as invalid and skip to the next
> > event.
> >
> > As a result, we'd see a flooding of "Invalid sensor number 255 from EC"
> > warning logs and these timestamp events were being dropped.
> >
> > Move the bounds-check into cros_ec_sensor_ring_process_event() and
> > evaluate it only after standalone timestamp events have already been
> > processed and returned early.
> >
> > [1] https://crrev.com/219ca6ef82ba266da788b673ee4ad50bd3ea1285/common/motion_sense_fifo.c#427
> >
> > Fixes: 833740a2333c ("platform/chrome: sensorhub: Bound the EC-reported sensor number")
> > Signed-off-by: Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@kernel.org>
> > ---
> > Bryam: sorry for reverting the decision (moving back the check to
> > cros_ec_sensor_ring_process_event()).  I realized we need to prevent
> > dropping timestamp events and flooding the logs.
> > ---
> > v2:
> > - Move the check to cros_ec_sensor_ring_process_event().
> > - Return earlier for standalone timestamp events.
> >
> > v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260714065202.3248017-1-tzungbi@kernel.org
> > ---
> >  .../platform/chrome/cros_ec_sensorhub_ring.c  | 27 ++++++++++---------
> >  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_sensorhub_ring.c b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_sensorhub_ring.c
> > index 92941924c347..d92b60213720 100644
> > --- a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_sensorhub_ring.c
> > +++ b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_sensorhub_ring.c
> > @@ -475,6 +475,21 @@ cros_ec_sensor_ring_process_event(struct cros_ec_sensorhub *sensorhub,
> >                                                   fifo_timestamp,
> >                                                   *current_timestamp,
> >                                                   now);
> > +
> > +               /*
> > +                * A standalone timestamp event typically has a sensor_num of
> > +                * 0xff.  Return early here to prevent it from hitting the
> > +                * bounds check below and spamming the logs.
> > +                */
> > +               return false;
> > +       }
> > +
> > +       /* Skip event if sensor_num from EC is out of bounds. */
> > +       if (in->sensor_num >= sensorhub->sensor_num) {
> > +               dev_warn_ratelimited(sensorhub->dev,
> > +                                    "Invalid sensor number %u from EC\n",
> > +                                    in->sensor_num);
> > +               return false;
> >         }
> >
> >         if (in->flags & MOTIONSENSE_SENSOR_FLAG_ODR) {
> > @@ -502,10 +517,6 @@ cros_ec_sensor_ring_process_event(struct cros_ec_sensorhub *sensorhub,
> >                 return true;
> >         }
> >
> > -       if (in->flags & MOTIONSENSE_SENSOR_FLAG_TIMESTAMP)
> > -               /* If we just have a timestamp, skip this entry. */
> > -               return false;
> > -
> 
> Isn't this still needed for the case of
> MOTIONSENSE_SENSOR_FLAG_TIMESTAMP and (MOTIONSENSE_SENSOR_FLAG_ODR
> and/or MOTIONSENSE_SENSOR_FLAG_FLUSH)?

The block serves for standalone MOTIONSENSE_SENSOR_FLAG_TIMESTAMP events.
If the flags contains ODR or FLUSH, it returns in other branches.

After applying the patch, the flow of cros_ec_sensor_ring_process_event()
looks like:

  If TIMESTAMP but (!ODR and !FLUSH):
     ...
     return   <--- The patch merges the block and returns early.

  Check bounds for sensor_num

  If ODR:
     ...
     return

  If FLUSH:
     ...
     return

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH v2] platform/chrome: sensorhub: Fix dropped timestamp events and log spam
  2026-07-15  9:28   ` Tzung-Bi Shih
@ 2026-07-15  9:30     ` Tomasz Figa
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Tomasz Figa @ 2026-07-15  9:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Tzung-Bi Shih; +Cc: Benson Leung, Bryam Vargas, chrome-platform, suleiman

On Wed, Jul 15, 2026 at 6:28 PM Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2026 at 04:15:22PM +0900, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 15, 2026 at 11:45 AM Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Commit 833740a2333c ("platform/chrome: sensorhub: Bound the EC-reported
> > > sensor number") evaluated the `sensor_num` against the bounds limit even
> > > for timestamp events.  A timestamp event typically has a `sensor_num` of
> > > 0xff [1], causing the driver to flag it as invalid and skip to the next
> > > event.
> > >
> > > As a result, we'd see a flooding of "Invalid sensor number 255 from EC"
> > > warning logs and these timestamp events were being dropped.
> > >
> > > Move the bounds-check into cros_ec_sensor_ring_process_event() and
> > > evaluate it only after standalone timestamp events have already been
> > > processed and returned early.
> > >
> > > [1] https://crrev.com/219ca6ef82ba266da788b673ee4ad50bd3ea1285/common/motion_sense_fifo.c#427
> > >
> > > Fixes: 833740a2333c ("platform/chrome: sensorhub: Bound the EC-reported sensor number")
> > > Signed-off-by: Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@kernel.org>
> > > ---
> > > Bryam: sorry for reverting the decision (moving back the check to
> > > cros_ec_sensor_ring_process_event()).  I realized we need to prevent
> > > dropping timestamp events and flooding the logs.
> > > ---
> > > v2:
> > > - Move the check to cros_ec_sensor_ring_process_event().
> > > - Return earlier for standalone timestamp events.
> > >
> > > v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260714065202.3248017-1-tzungbi@kernel.org
> > > ---
> > >  .../platform/chrome/cros_ec_sensorhub_ring.c  | 27 ++++++++++---------
> > >  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_sensorhub_ring.c b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_sensorhub_ring.c
> > > index 92941924c347..d92b60213720 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_sensorhub_ring.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_sensorhub_ring.c
> > > @@ -475,6 +475,21 @@ cros_ec_sensor_ring_process_event(struct cros_ec_sensorhub *sensorhub,
> > >                                                   fifo_timestamp,
> > >                                                   *current_timestamp,
> > >                                                   now);
> > > +
> > > +               /*
> > > +                * A standalone timestamp event typically has a sensor_num of
> > > +                * 0xff.  Return early here to prevent it from hitting the
> > > +                * bounds check below and spamming the logs.
> > > +                */
> > > +               return false;
> > > +       }
> > > +
> > > +       /* Skip event if sensor_num from EC is out of bounds. */
> > > +       if (in->sensor_num >= sensorhub->sensor_num) {
> > > +               dev_warn_ratelimited(sensorhub->dev,
> > > +                                    "Invalid sensor number %u from EC\n",
> > > +                                    in->sensor_num);
> > > +               return false;
> > >         }
> > >
> > >         if (in->flags & MOTIONSENSE_SENSOR_FLAG_ODR) {
> > > @@ -502,10 +517,6 @@ cros_ec_sensor_ring_process_event(struct cros_ec_sensorhub *sensorhub,
> > >                 return true;
> > >         }
> > >
> > > -       if (in->flags & MOTIONSENSE_SENSOR_FLAG_TIMESTAMP)
> > > -               /* If we just have a timestamp, skip this entry. */
> > > -               return false;
> > > -
> >
> > Isn't this still needed for the case of
> > MOTIONSENSE_SENSOR_FLAG_TIMESTAMP and (MOTIONSENSE_SENSOR_FLAG_ODR
> > and/or MOTIONSENSE_SENSOR_FLAG_FLUSH)?
>
> The block serves for standalone MOTIONSENSE_SENSOR_FLAG_TIMESTAMP events.
> If the flags contains ODR or FLUSH, it returns in other branches.
>
> After applying the patch, the flow of cros_ec_sensor_ring_process_event()
> looks like:
>
>   If TIMESTAMP but (!ODR and !FLUSH):
>      ...
>      return   <--- The patch merges the block and returns early.
>
>   Check bounds for sensor_num
>
>   If ODR:
>      ...
>      return
>
>   If FLUSH:
>      ...
>      return

Ah, right, I didn't notice that those blocks already returned. Sorry
for the noise.

Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa <tfiga@chromium.org>

Best,
Tomasz

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2026-07-15  9:31 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2026-07-15  2:44 [PATCH v2] platform/chrome: sensorhub: Fix dropped timestamp events and log spam Tzung-Bi Shih
2026-07-15  7:15 ` Tomasz Figa
2026-07-15  9:28   ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2026-07-15  9:30     ` Tomasz Figa

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.