6.12-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com
[ Upstream commit 737c3a09dcf69ba2814f3674947ccaec1861c985 ]
In some places in the ACPI device properties handling code, it is unclear why the code is what it is. Some assumptions are not documented and some pieces of code are based on knowledge that is not mentioned anywhere.
Add code comments explaining these things.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com Reviewed-by: Sakari Ailus sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com Tested-by: Sakari Ailus sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com Stable-dep-of: baf60d5cb8bc ("ACPI: property: Do not pass NULL handles to acpi_attach_data()") Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin sashal@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org --- drivers/acpi/property.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--- a/drivers/acpi/property.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/property.c @@ -108,7 +108,18 @@ static bool acpi_nondev_subnode_extract( if (handle) acpi_get_parent(handle, &scope);
+ /* + * Extract properties from the _DSD-equivalent package pointed to by + * desc and use scope (if not NULL) for the completion of relative + * pathname segments. + * + * The extracted properties will be held in the new data node dn. + */ result = acpi_extract_properties(scope, desc, &dn->data); + /* + * Look for subnodes in the _DSD-equivalent package pointed to by desc + * and create child nodes of dn if there are any. + */ if (acpi_enumerate_nondev_subnodes(scope, desc, &dn->data, &dn->fwnode)) result = true;
@@ -133,6 +144,12 @@ static bool acpi_nondev_subnode_ok(acpi_ acpi_handle handle; acpi_status status;
+ /* + * If the scope is unknown, the _DSD-equivalent package being parsed + * was embedded in an outer _DSD-equivalent package as a result of + * direct evaluation of an object pointed to by a reference. In that + * case, using a pathname as the target object pointer is invalid. + */ if (!scope) return false;
@@ -162,6 +179,10 @@ static bool acpi_add_nondev_subnodes(acp bool ret = false; int i;
+ /* + * Every element in the links package is expected to represent a link + * to a non-device node in a tree containing device-specific data. + */ for (i = 0; i < links->package.count; i++) { union acpi_object *link, *desc; bool result; @@ -171,17 +192,38 @@ static bool acpi_add_nondev_subnodes(acp if (link->package.count != 2) continue;
- /* The first one must be a string. */ + /* The first one (the key) must be a string. */ if (link->package.elements[0].type != ACPI_TYPE_STRING) continue;
- /* The second one may be a string or a package. */ + /* The second one (the target) may be a string or a package. */ switch (link->package.elements[1].type) { case ACPI_TYPE_STRING: + /* + * The string is expected to be a full pathname or a + * pathname segment relative to the given scope. That + * pathname is expected to point to an object returning + * a package that contains _DSD-equivalent information. + */ result = acpi_nondev_subnode_ok(scope, link, list, parent); break; case ACPI_TYPE_PACKAGE: + /* + * This happens when a reference is used in AML to + * point to the target. Since the target is expected + * to be a named object, a reference to it will cause it + * to be avaluated in place and its return package will + * be embedded in the links package at the location of + * the reference. + * + * The target package is expected to contain _DSD- + * equivalent information, but the scope in which it + * is located in the original AML is unknown. Thus + * it cannot contain pathname segments represented as + * strings because there is no way to build full + * pathnames out of them. + */ desc = &link->package.elements[1]; result = acpi_nondev_subnode_extract(desc, NULL, link, list, parent);