* [GIT PULL] ACPI fix for v6.16-rc3
@ 2025-06-21 11:31 Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-06-21 15:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2025-06-21 15:47 ` pr-tracker-bot
0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2025-06-21 11:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds; +Cc: ACPI Devel Maling List, Linux Kernel Mailing List
Hi Linus,
Please pull from the tag
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git \
acpi-6.16-rc3
with top-most commit 6fcab2791543924d438e7fa49276d0998b0a069f
ACPICA: Refuse to evaluate a method if arguments are missing
on top of commit e04c78d86a9699d136910cfc0bdcf01087e3267e
Linux 6.16-rc2
to receive an ACPI fix for 6.16-rc3.
This fixes a crash in ACPICA while attempting to evaluate a control
method that expects more arguments than are being passed to it, which
was exposed by a defective firmware update from a prominent OEM on
multiple systems.
Thanks!
---------------
Rafael J. Wysocki (1):
ACPICA: Refuse to evaluate a method if arguments are missing
---------------
drivers/acpi/acpica/dsmethod.c | 7 +++++++
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [GIT PULL] ACPI fix for v6.16-rc3
2025-06-21 11:31 [GIT PULL] ACPI fix for v6.16-rc3 Rafael J. Wysocki
@ 2025-06-21 15:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2025-06-22 10:53 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-06-21 15:47 ` pr-tracker-bot
1 sibling, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Linus Torvalds @ 2025-06-21 15:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael J. Wysocki; +Cc: ACPI Devel Maling List, Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Sat, 21 Jun 2025 at 04:31, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> This fixes a crash in ACPICA while attempting to evaluate a control
> method that expects more arguments than are being passed to it, which
> was exposed by a defective firmware update from a prominent OEM on
> multiple systems.
Christ. Reading the ACPI issues page makes me go "D'oh".
Does anybody know what the heck Windows does in this situation? Does
it just happen to work because it uses random arguments and happily
dereferences bogus things without realizing, or does it do the "zero
out missing arguments" thing?
Because clearly that firmware bug must have passed entirely unnoticed
by people testing that thing on Windows...
Linus
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [GIT PULL] ACPI fix for v6.16-rc3
2025-06-21 11:31 [GIT PULL] ACPI fix for v6.16-rc3 Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-06-21 15:35 ` Linus Torvalds
@ 2025-06-21 15:47 ` pr-tracker-bot
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: pr-tracker-bot @ 2025-06-21 15:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael J. Wysocki
Cc: Linus Torvalds, ACPI Devel Maling List, Linux Kernel Mailing List
The pull request you sent on Sat, 21 Jun 2025 13:31:37 +0200:
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git acpi-6.16-rc3
has been merged into torvalds/linux.git:
https://git.kernel.org/torvalds/c/26fef998eb4df8781c038ffa4be8287219a8df0a
Thank you!
--
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/prtracker.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [GIT PULL] ACPI fix for v6.16-rc3
2025-06-21 15:35 ` Linus Torvalds
@ 2025-06-22 10:53 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2025-06-22 10:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds
Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki, ACPI Devel Maling List,
Linux Kernel Mailing List, Saket Dumbre
On Sat, Jun 21, 2025 at 5:35 PM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 21 Jun 2025 at 04:31, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > This fixes a crash in ACPICA while attempting to evaluate a control
> > method that expects more arguments than are being passed to it, which
> > was exposed by a defective firmware update from a prominent OEM on
> > multiple systems.
>
> Christ. Reading the ACPI issues page makes me go "D'oh".
>
> Does anybody know what the heck Windows does in this situation? Does
> it just happen to work because it uses random arguments and happily
> dereferences bogus things without realizing, or does it do the "zero
> out missing arguments" thing?
Saket said: "I didn't run into this same bug on Windows though and the
interpreter just aborted out with a different error message saying
that this method already exists elsewhere. Maybe Windows thinks that
when RUCC is called with 2 args instead of 3, it is perhaps referring
to a different method with the same name, but warns that this name
already exists (AE_ALREADY_EXISTS)."
> Because clearly that firmware bug must have passed entirely unnoticed
> by people testing that thing on Windows...
Well, given the above, I'm wondering how it has been tested on
Windows. It looks like somebody set a really low bar for the
verification of it.
Cheers, Rafael
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2025-06-22 10:53 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2025-06-21 11:31 [GIT PULL] ACPI fix for v6.16-rc3 Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-06-21 15:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2025-06-22 10:53 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-06-21 15:47 ` pr-tracker-bot
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).