[v9,04/19] ACPI: processor: Return an error if acpi_processor_get_info() fails in processor_add()

Commit Message

Jonathan Cameron April 30, 2024, 2:24 p.m. UTC

Rafael observed [1] that returning 0 from processor_add() will result in
acpi_default_enumeration() being called which will attempt to create a
platform device, but that makes little sense when the processor is known
to be not available.  So just return the error code from acpi_processor_get_info()
instead.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAJZ5v0iKU8ra9jR+EmgxbuNm=[e-mail]/ [1]
Suggested-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <[e-mail]>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron <[e-mail]>

---
v9: New patch following through from Gavin pointing out a memory leak later
    in the series.
---
 drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Comments

Gavin Shan May 1, 2024, 10:18 a.m. UTC | #1

On 5/1/24 00:24, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> Rafael observed [1] that returning 0 from processor_add() will result in
> acpi_default_enumeration() being called which will attempt to create a
> platform device, but that makes little sense when the processor is known
> to be not available.  So just return the error code from acpi_processor_get_info()
> instead.
> 
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAJZ5v0iKU8ra9jR+EmgxbuNm=[e-mail]/ [1]
> Suggested-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <[e-mail]>
> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron <[e-mail]>
> 
> ---
> v9: New patch following through from Gavin pointing out a memory leak later
>      in the series.
> ---
>   drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c | 2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 

Reviewed-by: Gavin Shan <[e-mail]>

Rafael J. Wysocki May 7, 2024, 6:55 p.m. UTC | #2

On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 4:26 PM Jonathan Cameron
<[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Rafael observed [1] that returning 0 from processor_add() will result in
> acpi_default_enumeration() being called which will attempt to create a
> platform device, but that makes little sense when the processor is known
> to be not available.  So just return the error code from acpi_processor_get_info()
> instead.
>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAJZ5v0iKU8ra9jR+EmgxbuNm=[e-mail]/ [1]
> Suggested-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <[e-mail]>
> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron <[e-mail]>

Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <[e-mail]>

Thank you!

> ---
> v9: New patch following through from Gavin pointing out a memory leak later
>     in the series.
> ---
>  drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> index 161c95c9d60a..5f062806ca40 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> @@ -393,7 +393,7 @@ static int acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device *device,
>
>         result = acpi_processor_get_info(device);
>         if (result) /* Processor is not physically present or unavailable */
> -               return 0;
> +               return result;
>
>         BUG_ON(pr->id >= nr_cpu_ids);
>
> --
> 2.39.2
>

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
index 161c95c9d60a..5f062806ca40 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
@@ -393,7 +393,7 @@  static int acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device *device,
 
 	result = acpi_processor_get_info(device);
 	if (result) /* Processor is not physically present or unavailable */
-		return 0;
+		return result;
 
 	BUG_ON(pr->id >= nr_cpu_ids);