Skip to contentSkip to conversation

power: validate wakeup source before activating it.

PATCH Applied Jin Qian 2 participants 4 messages May 6, 2015 – May 18, 2015

Subsystems (4)
lore
Share & tools
lore

Jin Qian

author
#0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 power: validate wakeup source before activating it.

A rogue wakeup source not registered in wakeup_sources list is not visible from wakeup_sources_stats_show. Check if the wakeup source is registered properly by looking at the timer struct.

---
 drivers/base/power/wakeup.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
drivers/base/power/wakeup.c +18 -0
index 7726200..7b5ad9a 100644
@@ -351,6 +351,20 @@ int device_set_wakeup_enable(struct device *dev, bool enable)
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(device_set_wakeup_enable);
 
+/**
+ * wakeup_source_not_registered - validate the given wakeup source.
+ * @ws: Wakeup source to be validated.
+ */
+static bool wakeup_source_not_registered(struct wakeup_source *ws)
+{
+	/*
+	 * Use timer struct to check if the given source is initialized
+	 * by wakeup_source_add.
+	 */
+	return ws->timer.function != pm_wakeup_timer_fn ||
+		   ws->timer.data != (unsigned long)ws;
+}
+
 /*
  * The functions below use the observation that each wakeup event starts a
  * period in which the system should not be suspended.  The moment this period
@@ -391,6 +405,10 @@ static void wakeup_source_activate(struct wakeup_source *ws)
 {
 	unsigned int cec;
 
+	if (WARN_ONCE(wakeup_source_not_registered(ws),
+			"unregistered wakeup source\n"))
+		return;
+
 	/*
 	 * active wakeup source should bring the system
 	 * out of PM_SUSPEND_FREEZE state
Signature · 1 line
2.2.0.rc0.207.ga3a616c
#1 lore raw
Quoted 35 lines · Jin Qian

A rogue wakeup source not registered in wakeup_sources list is not visible from wakeup_sources_stats_show. Check if the wakeup source is registered properly by looking at the timer struct.

---
 drivers/base/power/wakeup.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
drivers/base/power/wakeup.c +14 -0
index 7726200..7b5ad9a 100644
@@ -351,6 +351,20 @@ int device_set_wakeup_enable(struct device *dev, bool enable)
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(device_set_wakeup_enable);
 
+/**
+ * wakeup_source_not_registered - validate the given wakeup source.
+ * @ws: Wakeup source to be validated.
+ */
+static bool wakeup_source_not_registered(struct wakeup_source *ws)
+{
+	/*
+	 * Use timer struct to check if the given source is initialized
+	 * by wakeup_source_add.
+	 */
+	return ws->timer.function != pm_wakeup_timer_fn ||
+		   ws->timer.data != (unsigned long)ws;
+}
+
 /*
  * The functions below use the observation that each wakeup event starts a
  * period in which the system should not be suspended.  The moment this period

drivers/base/power/wakeup.c static void wakeup_source_activate(struct wakeup_source *ws) · line 414

Quoted 10 lines
drivers/base/power/wakeup.c +4 -0
@@ -391,6 +405,10 @@ static void wakeup_source_activate(struct wakeup_source *ws)
 {
 	unsigned int cec;
 
+	if (WARN_ONCE(wakeup_source_not_registered(ws),
+			"unregistered wakeup source\n"))
+		return;
+
 	/*
 	 * active wakeup source should bring the system
 	 * out of PM_SUSPEND_FREEZE state

Queued up for 4.2, thanks!

Signature · 2 lines
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
author
#2 lore raw

Hi Rafael,

The latest version is in [PATCHv3 1/3] power: validate wakeup source before activating it. I changed WARN_ONCE back to WARN since if multiple drivers activating uninitialized wakeup_sources, only the first driver will by flagged. We lost alert for other drivers. The warning should really happen during driver development. Hope this is ok.

Thanks,
jin

Quoted 53 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 35 lines · Jin Qian

A rogue wakeup source not registered in wakeup_sources list is not visible from wakeup_sources_stats_show. Check if the wakeup source is registered properly by looking at the timer struct.

---
 drivers/base/power/wakeup.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
drivers/base/power/wakeup.c +14 -0
index 7726200..7b5ad9a 100644
@@ -351,6 +351,20 @@ int device_set_wakeup_enable(struct device *dev, bool enable)
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(device_set_wakeup_enable);
 
+/**
+ * wakeup_source_not_registered - validate the given wakeup source.
+ * @ws: Wakeup source to be validated.
+ */
+static bool wakeup_source_not_registered(struct wakeup_source *ws)
+{
+     /*
+      * Use timer struct to check if the given source is initialized
+      * by wakeup_source_add.
+      */
+     return ws->timer.function != pm_wakeup_timer_fn ||
+                ws->timer.data != (unsigned long)ws;
+}
+
 /*
  * The functions below use the observation that each wakeup event starts a
  * period in which the system should not be suspended.  The moment this period

drivers/base/power/wakeup.c static void wakeup_source_activate(struct wakeup_source *ws) · line 414

Quoted 10 lines
drivers/base/power/wakeup.c +4 -0
@@ -391,6 +405,10 @@ static void wakeup_source_activate(struct wakeup_source *ws)
 {
      unsigned int cec;
 
+     if (WARN_ONCE(wakeup_source_not_registered(ws),
+                     "unregistered wakeup source\n"))
+             return;
+
      /*
       * active wakeup source should bring the system
       * out of PM_SUSPEND_FREEZE state

Queued up for 4.2, thanks!

--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.

#3 lore raw
Quoted 6 lines · Jin Qian

Hi Rafael,

The latest version is in [PATCHv3 1/3] power: validate wakeup source before activating it. I changed WARN_ONCE back to WARN since if multiple drivers activating uninitialized wakeup_sources, only the first driver will by flagged.

Which is OK.

If you're a user, you can't fix the problem by yourself and spamming the logs with continued warnings doesn't help here.

If you're a developer, you'll fix the first driver and then see the warning from the second one.

Quoted 2 lines

We lost alert for other drivers. The warning should really happen during driver development. Hope this is ok.

First, I've applied your patch already. Second, I really think that WARN_ON_ONCE() is better here.

Signature · 2 lines
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.