From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (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 05E4B330B21; Tue, 23 Dec 2025 11:18:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.176.79.56 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1766488701; cv=none; b=SHqq9Wy0giTSW12yoyWLeNT6UI3OlbThQSO/L95QDyA/blPKBPt5enTUcy15IdNfh5BM8U+C1vOt5EbQ+79BlXJxUPtu5cIyJGB45TrsRnR/+8/nSQ5Ww7stVkDHMC0BzbbIMHlKlM2nfe6D0w/MBa3Oz4bqZGg7OzOYB5wVp+I= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1766488701; c=relaxed/simple; bh=o6gUd3KjCrrNX+odeZ21l5up08lsDRbc24Z4xFWuysE=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=rU0csG/AiizTCdMLZ5oAZiLLfMo4FVwm3R2ijL+rIdQNWjJyuW9RaE6BvCMGLRKpyEUmrG2Dx7RnPCXQDcDqzrZ5K/l2jfC+0hPjRKTALYIR8pON+g8EvfC0c7y8jt51X/GUcSC6GFlgDgyf3SSm3WFWAs6RmzlQ1mqNeKMJxOI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.176.79.56 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.18.224.107]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTPS id 4dbCCh4r7VzJ46d6; Tue, 23 Dec 2025 19:17:36 +0800 (CST) Received: from dubpeml100005.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.214.146.113]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B0F4F4057A; Tue, 23 Dec 2025 19:18:15 +0800 (CST) Received: from localhost (10.203.177.15) by dubpeml100005.china.huawei.com (7.214.146.113) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.36; Tue, 23 Dec 2025 11:18:15 +0000 Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2025 11:18:13 +0000 From: Jonathan Cameron To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux ACPI , LKML CC: Linux PCI , Bjorn Helgaas , Srinivas Pandruvada , Hans de Goede , Mario Limonciello Subject: Re: [PATCH v2.1 3/8] ACPI: bus: Split _OSC evaluation out of acpi_run_osc() Message-ID: <20251223111813.00000d67@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <22963770.EfDdHjke4D@rafael.j.wysocki> References: <2413407.ElGaqSPkdT@rafael.j.wysocki> <22963770.EfDdHjke4D@rafael.j.wysocki> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.3.0 (GTK 3.24.42; x86_64-w64-mingw32) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ClientProxiedBy: lhrpeml100009.china.huawei.com (7.191.174.83) To dubpeml100005.china.huawei.com (7.214.146.113) On Mon, 22 Dec 2025 20:14:16 +0100 "Rafael J. Wysocki" wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > > Split a function for evaluating _OSC called acpi_eval_osc() out of > acpi_run_osc() to facilitate subsequent changes and add some more > parameters sanity checks to the latter. > > No intentional functional impact. > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki Hi Rafael, There is a little bit of reformatting / whitespace cleanup in here that makes it a tiny bit harder to review than if that had been done separately. Not worth a respin though. Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron > --- > > v1 -> v2.1: > * Fix typo in the changelog (Jonathan). > * Use at_least to enforce compiler checking of in_params[] size instead of > using "static" directly (Jonathan). > > --- > drivers/acpi/bus.c | 91 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------- > 1 file changed, 53 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-) > > --- a/drivers/acpi/bus.c > +++ b/drivers/acpi/bus.c > @@ -196,52 +196,67 @@ static void acpi_dump_osc_data(acpi_hand > OSC_INVALID_REVISION_ERROR | \ > OSC_CAPABILITIES_MASK_ERROR) > > -acpi_status acpi_run_osc(acpi_handle handle, struct acpi_osc_context *context) > +static int acpi_eval_osc(acpi_handle handle, guid_t *guid, int rev, > + struct acpi_buffer *cap, > + union acpi_object in_params[at_least 4], > + struct acpi_buffer *output) > { > - u32 errors, *capbuf = context->cap.pointer; > - acpi_status status; > struct acpi_object_list input; > - union acpi_object in_params[4]; > union acpi_object *out_obj; > - guid_t guid; > - struct acpi_buffer output = {ACPI_ALLOCATE_BUFFER, NULL}; > - > - if (!context) > - return AE_ERROR; > - if (guid_parse(context->uuid_str, &guid)) > - return AE_ERROR; > - context->ret.length = ACPI_ALLOCATE_BUFFER; > - context->ret.pointer = NULL; > + acpi_status status; > > - /* Setting up input parameters */ > - input.count = 4; > + in_params[0].type = ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER; > + in_params[0].buffer.length = sizeof(*guid); > + in_params[0].buffer.pointer = (u8 *)guid; > + in_params[1].type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER; > + in_params[1].integer.value = rev; > + in_params[2].type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER; > + in_params[2].integer.value = cap->length / sizeof(u32); > + in_params[3].type = ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER; > + in_params[3].buffer.length = cap->length; > + in_params[3].buffer.pointer = cap->pointer; > input.pointer = in_params; > - in_params[0].type = ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER; > - in_params[0].buffer.length = 16; > - in_params[0].buffer.pointer = (u8 *)&guid; > - in_params[1].type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER; > - in_params[1].integer.value = context->rev; > - in_params[2].type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER; > - in_params[2].integer.value = context->cap.length/sizeof(u32); > - in_params[3].type = ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER; > - in_params[3].buffer.length = context->cap.length; > - in_params[3].buffer.pointer = context->cap.pointer; Not sure I'd have made this formatting change in here because it 'might' have hidden real functional changes from reviewers. > - > - status = acpi_evaluate_object(handle, "_OSC", &input, &output); > - if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) > - return status; > + input.count = 4; > > - if (!output.length) > - return AE_NULL_OBJECT; > + output->length = ACPI_ALLOCATE_BUFFER; > + output->pointer = NULL; > > - out_obj = output.pointer; > - if (out_obj->type != ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER > - || out_obj->buffer.length != context->cap.length) { > - acpi_dump_osc_data(handle, &guid, context->rev, &context->cap); > - acpi_handle_debug(handle, "_OSC: evaluation returned wrong type"); > - status = AE_TYPE; > - goto out_kfree; > + status = acpi_evaluate_object(handle, "_OSC", &input, output); > + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status) || !output->length) > + return -ENODATA; > + > + out_obj = output->pointer; > + if (out_obj->type != ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER || > + out_obj->buffer.length != cap->length) { > + acpi_handle_debug(handle, "Invalid _OSC return buffer\n"); > + acpi_dump_osc_data(handle, guid, rev, cap); > + ACPI_FREE(out_obj); > + return -ENODATA; > } > + > + return 0; > +}