From: Markus Armbruster <armbru@pond.sub.org>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@mail.ru>, Steven Rostedt <srostedt@redhat.com>
Subject: [PATCH] input: Fix interrupt enable in i8042_ctr when enabling interrupt fails
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 15:50:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87fy3sxvit.fsf@pike.pond.sub.org> (raw)
When enabling interrupts fails, the interrupt enable bit remains set
in i8042_ctr. Later writes of i8042_ctr to the hardware could
accidentally retry enabling interrupts. Clear the bit on failure.
Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
---
Some time ago Steven Rostedt and I went over this changeset:
commit de9ce703c6b807b1dfef5942df4f2fadd0fdb67a
Author: Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@insightbb.com>
Date: Sun Sep 10 21:57:21 2006 -0400
Input: i8042 - get rid of polling timer
Remove polling timer that was used to detect keybord/mice hotplug and
register both IRQs right away instead of waiting for a driver to
attach to a port.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@mail.ru>
Steven pointed out to me that it changes behavior when enabling IRQ
fails.
The old code enabled IRQs this way:
i8042_ctr |= port->irqen;
if (i8042_command(&i8042_ctr, I8042_CMD_CTL_WCTR)) {
i8042_ctr &= ~port->irqen;
return -1;
}
i8042_ctr shadows the 8042's CTR. So, when enabling fails, the bit is
cleared in the shadow.
The new code does not clear the bit on the error path:
static int i8042_enable_kbd_port(void)
{
i8042_ctr &= ~I8042_CTR_KBDDIS;
i8042_ctr |= I8042_CTR_KBDINT;
if (i8042_command(&i8042_ctr, I8042_CMD_CTL_WCTR)) {
printk(KERN_ERR "i8042.c: Failed to enable KBD port.\n");
return -EIO;
}
return 0;
}
Same for i8042_enable_aux_port().
This leads to the question whether there are later writes of i8042_ctr
(possibly with other bits altered) to the hardware, which could
accidentally retry enabling interrupts.
I believe this possible, but unlikely. Scenarios involve enable
succeeding the first time, failing the second time, and succeeding the
third time. I can provide details, but the point I'd like to make is
not that this is broken (although it is, strictly speaking), but that
it is not obviously correct where it easily could be: just clear the
interrupt enable bits when writing them to the hardware failed, like
the old code did.
diff --git a/drivers/input/serio/i8042.c b/drivers/input/serio/i8042.c
index db9cca3..71a7e39 100644
--- a/drivers/input/serio/i8042.c
+++ b/drivers/input/serio/i8042.c
@@ -385,6 +385,7 @@ static int i8042_enable_kbd_port(void)
i8042_ctr |= I8042_CTR_KBDINT;
if (i8042_command(&i8042_ctr, I8042_CMD_CTL_WCTR)) {
+ i8042_ctr &= ~I8042_CTR_KBDINT;
printk(KERN_ERR "i8042.c: Failed to enable KBD port.\n");
return -EIO;
}
@@ -402,6 +403,7 @@ static int i8042_enable_aux_port(void)
i8042_ctr |= I8042_CTR_AUXINT;
if (i8042_command(&i8042_ctr, I8042_CMD_CTL_WCTR)) {
+ i8042_ctr &= ~I8042_CTR_AUXINT;
printk(KERN_ERR "i8042.c: Failed to enable AUX port.\n");
return -EIO;
}
next reply other threads:[~2007-07-13 13:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-07-13 13:50 Markus Armbruster [this message]
2007-07-31 12:56 ` [PATCH] input: Fix interrupt enable in i8042_ctr when enabling interrupt fails Steven Rostedt
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-09-10 12:41 Markus Armbruster
2007-09-10 12:59 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-09-10 13:14 ` Dmitry Torokhov
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=87fy3sxvit.fsf@pike.pond.sub.org \
--to=armbru@pond.sub.org \
--cc=dtor@mail.ru \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=srostedt@redhat.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox