[PATCH]

PATCH Applied Roel Kluin 3 participants 4 messages Nov 15, 2007 – Dec 4, 2007 ACPI

Share & tools

Roel Kluin

author

2007-11-15 22:03 UTC #0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 [PATCH]

I have sent this patch before to lkml, but it appears it wasn't picked up. Also I have to admit this isn't tested. This is a patch against linus' tree.

ACPI_MADT_ENABLED is defined 1 (include/acpi/actbl1.h 501)
lapic_flags: an u32 of struct acpi_madt_local_sapic (include/acpi/actbl1.h 467) --
'!' has a higher priority than '&', so as was
this won't test the first bit, but rather evaluates to false for any non-zero lsapic->lapic_flags.

Signed-off-by Roel Kluin <[email protected]>

---

arch/ia64/kernel/acpi.c +1 -1

index 3d45d24..7d78d22 100644
@@ -858,7 +858,7 @@ int acpi_map_lsapic(acpi_handle handle, int *pcpu)
 	lsapic = (struct acpi_madt_local_sapic *)obj->buffer.pointer;
 
 	if ((lsapic->header.type != ACPI_MADT_TYPE_LOCAL_SAPIC) ||
-	    (!lsapic->lapic_flags & ACPI_MADT_ENABLED)) {
+	    (!(lsapic->lapic_flags & ACPI_MADT_ENABLED))) {
 		kfree(buffer.pointer);
 		return -EINVAL;
 	}

Roel Kluin

author

2007-11-15 22:32 UTC #1 lore raw

Re: [PATCH with title] priority fix in acpi_map_lsapic() arch/ia64/kernel/acpi.c

As above should have been its title.

Quoted 26 lines · Roel Kluin

I have sent this patch before to lkml, but it appears it wasn't picked up. Also I have to admit this isn't tested. This is a patch against linus' tree.
ACPI_MADT_ENABLED is defined 1 (include/acpi/actbl1.h 501)
lapic_flags: an u32 of struct acpi_madt_local_sapic (include/acpi/actbl1.h 467) --
'!' has a higher priority than '&', so as was
this won't test the first bit, but rather evaluates to false for any non-zero lsapic->lapic_flags.
Signed-off-by Roel Kluin <[email protected]>
---
arch/ia64/kernel/acpi.c +1 -1
index 3d45d24..7d78d22 100644
@@ -858,7 +858,7 @@ int acpi_map_lsapic(acpi_handle handle, int *pcpu)
 	lsapic = (struct acpi_madt_local_sapic *)obj->buffer.pointer;
 
 	if ((lsapic->header.type != ACPI_MADT_TYPE_LOCAL_SAPIC) ||
-	    (!lsapic->lapic_flags & ACPI_MADT_ENABLED)) {
+	    (!(lsapic->lapic_flags & ACPI_MADT_ENABLED))) {
 		kfree(buffer.pointer);
 		return -EINVAL;
 	}

Simon Horman

Acked-by

2007-11-20 06:51 UTC #2 lore raw

Re: [PATCH with title] priority fix in acpi_map_lsapic() arch/ia64/kernel/acpi.c

Quoted 14 lines · Roel Kluin

As above should have been its title.
Quoted 11 lines · Roel Kluin
I have sent this patch before to lkml, but it appears it wasn't picked up. Also I have to admit this isn't tested. This is a patch against linus' tree.
ACPI_MADT_ENABLED is defined 1 (include/acpi/actbl1.h 501)
lapic_flags: an u32 of struct acpi_madt_local_sapic (include/acpi/actbl1.h 467) --
'!' has a higher priority than '&', so as was
this won't test the first bit, but rather evaluates to false for any non-zero lsapic->lapic_flags.
Signed-off-by Roel Kluin <[email protected]>

This looks correct to me, though I was curious to know why the problem wasn't manifesting in a bug. I investigated
a bit and found that it seems that the only values lapic_flags currently takes are 0 and ACPI_MADT_ENABLED,
so it turns out that the bogus logic actually gives the correct result (by chance).

Acked-by Simon Horman <[email protected]>

Quoted 15 lines

---

arch/ia64/kernel/acpi.c +1 -1

index 3d45d24..7d78d22 100644
@@ -858,7 +858,7 @@ int acpi_map_lsapic(acpi_handle handle, int *pcpu)
 	lsapic = (struct acpi_madt_local_sapic *)obj->buffer.pointer;
 
 	if ((lsapic->header.type != ACPI_MADT_TYPE_LOCAL_SAPIC) ||
-	    (!lsapic->lapic_flags & ACPI_MADT_ENABLED)) {
+	    (!(lsapic->lapic_flags & ACPI_MADT_ENABLED))) {
 		kfree(buffer.pointer);
 		return -EINVAL;
 	}

Signature · 1 line

Horms

Len Brown

reviewer Applied

2007-12-04 06:22 UTC #3 lore raw

Re: [PATCH with title] priority fix in acpi_map_lsapic() arch/ia64/kernel/acpi.c

Applied.

thanks,
-Len

Quoted 41 lines · Simon Horman

Quoted 14 lines · Roel Kluin
As above should have been its title.
Quoted 11 lines · Roel Kluin
I have sent this patch before to lkml, but it appears it wasn't picked up. Also I have to admit this isn't tested. This is a patch against linus' tree.
ACPI_MADT_ENABLED is defined 1 (include/acpi/actbl1.h 501)
lapic_flags: an u32 of struct acpi_madt_local_sapic (include/acpi/actbl1.h 467) --
'!' has a higher priority than '&', so as was
this won't test the first bit, but rather evaluates to false for any non-zero lsapic->lapic_flags.
Signed-off-by Roel Kluin <[email protected]>
This looks correct to me, though I was curious to know why the problem wasn't manifesting in a bug. I investigated
a bit and found that it seems that the only values lapic_flags currently takes are 0 and ACPI_MADT_ENABLED,
so it turns out that the bogus logic actually gives the correct result (by chance).
Acked-by Simon Horman <[email protected]>
Quoted 15 lines
Quoted 15 lines
---
arch/ia64/kernel/acpi.c +1 -1
index 3d45d24..7d78d22 100644
@@ -858,7 +858,7 @@ int acpi_map_lsapic(acpi_handle handle, int *pcpu)
 	lsapic = (struct acpi_madt_local_sapic *)obj->buffer.pointer;
 
 	if ((lsapic->header.type != ACPI_MADT_TYPE_LOCAL_SAPIC) ||
-	    (!lsapic->lapic_flags & ACPI_MADT_ENABLED)) {
+	    (!(lsapic->lapic_flags & ACPI_MADT_ENABLED))) {
 		kfree(buffer.pointer);
 		return -EINVAL;
 	}