From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: quic_zijuhu <quic_zijuhu@quicinc.com>,
davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org,
pabeni@redhat.com, emmanuel.grumbach@intel.com
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] net: rfkill: Fix a logic error within rfkill_set_hw_state_reason()
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2024 12:11:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <be3576e234177f8da28be8ba37fd369c00fb548d.camel@sipsolutions.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b8610296-f8cf-4b61-9b64-ffb52b7ab251@quicinc.com>
On Wed, 2024-06-12 at 17:43 +0800, quic_zijuhu wrote:
> On 6/12/2024 4:18 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > On Fri, 2024-06-07 at 22:40 +0800, Zijun Hu wrote:
> > > Kernel API rfkill_set_hw_state_reason() wrongly gets previous block state
> > > by using its parameter @reason as reason mask.
> >
> > Using reason as a mask is perfectly valid.
> >
> > And checking that the bit changed also seems valid.
> >
> i don't think so as explained below.
> let us assume @rfkill->hard_block_reasons has value
> RFKILL_HARD_BLOCK_SIGNAL which means block state before
> __rfkill_set_sw_state(..., true, RFKILL_HARD_BLOCK_NOT_OWNER) is invoked.
>
> @prev should mean previous block state, @prev will have false based on
> current logic, it is wrong since rfkill have block state before the call.
>
> > We might want to not schedule the worker if it's not needed, but that's
> > a different issue, I don't see a real bug here?
> >
> the worker will be unneccessarily scheduled for above example based on
> current logic even if the rfkill always stay in block state.
> >
But yes, this is right. It's just not a bug.
johannes
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-12 10:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-07 14:40 [PATCH v1 0/2] net: rfkill: Fix 2 bugs within rfkill_set_hw_state_reason() Zijun Hu
2024-06-07 14:40 ` [PATCH v1 1/2] net: rfkill: Fix a wrongly handling error case Zijun Hu
2024-06-12 8:15 ` Johannes Berg
2024-06-12 10:12 ` quic_zijuhu
2024-06-12 10:14 ` Johannes Berg
2024-06-07 14:40 ` [PATCH v1 2/2] net: rfkill: Fix a logic error within rfkill_set_hw_state_reason() Zijun Hu
2024-06-12 8:18 ` Johannes Berg
2024-06-12 9:43 ` quic_zijuhu
2024-06-12 10:10 ` Johannes Berg
2024-06-12 10:11 ` Johannes Berg [this message]
2024-06-12 10:18 ` Johannes Berg
2024-06-12 10:35 ` quic_zijuhu
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=be3576e234177f8da28be8ba37fd369c00fb548d.camel@sipsolutions.net \
--to=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=emmanuel.grumbach@intel.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=quic_zijuhu@quicinc.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