lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2024]   [Apr]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] platform/x86: quickstart: Fix race condition when reporting input event
From
Am 07.04.24 um 17:32 schrieb Hans de Goede:

> Hi,
>
> On 4/6/24 8:57 PM, Armin Wolf wrote:
>> Am 27.03.24 um 22:45 schrieb Armin Wolf:
>>
>>> Since commit e2ffcda16290 ("ACPI: OSL: Allow Notify () handlers to run
>>> on all CPUs"), the ACPI core allows multiple notify calls to be active
>>> at the same time. This means that two instances of quickstart_notify()
>>> running at the same time can mess which each others input sequences.
>>>
>>> Fix this by protecting the input sequence with a mutex.
>>>
>>> Compile-tested only.
>> Any thoughts on this?
> I wonder if we need this at all ?
>
> The input_event() / input_report_key() / input_sync() functions
> which underpin sparse_keymap_report_event() all are safe to be called
> from multiple threads at the same time AFAIK.
>
> The only thing which can then still go "wrong" if we have
> 2 sparse_keymap_report_event() functions racing for the same
> quickstart button and thus for the same keycode is that we may
> end up with:
>
> input_report_key(dev, keycode, 1);
> input_report_key(dev, keycode, 1); /* This is a no-op */
> input_sync(); /* + another input_sync() somewhere which is a no-op */
> input_report_key(dev, keycode, 0);
> input_report_key(dev, keycode, 0); /* This is a no-op */
> input_sync(); /* + another input_sync() somewhere which is a no-op */
>
> IOW if 2 racing notifiers hit the perfect race conditions then
> only 1 key press is reported, instead of 2 which seems like
> it is not a problem since arguably if the same event gets
> reported twice at the exact same time it probably really
> is only a single button press.
>
> Also I think it is highly unlikely we will actually see
> 2 notifiers for this racing in practice.
>
> So I don't think we need this at all. But if others feel strongly
> about adding this I can still merge it... ?
>
> Regards,
>
> Hans

Hi,

the locking issue was originally brought up by Ilpo Jarvinen during the review of the lenovo-wmi-camera driver.
Also the race condition can cause an invalid input sequence to be emitted:

input_report_key(dev, keycode, 1);
input_sync();
input_report_key(dev, keycode, 0); // Possible invalid sequence?
input_report_key(dev, keycode, 1);
input_sync();
input_sync();
input_report_key(dev, keycode, 0);
input_sync();


I think this input sequence would be invalid, so we need the locking.

Thanks,
Armin Wolf

>>> Fixes: afd66f2a739e ("platform/x86: Add ACPI quickstart button (PNP0C32) driver")
>>> Signed-off-by: Armin Wolf <W_Armin@gmx.de>
>>> ---
>>> This applies on the branch "review-hans". Maybe we could somehow
>>> document the concurrency rules for ACPI notify handlers?
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/platform/x86/quickstart.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
>>>   1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/quickstart.c b/drivers/platform/x86/quickstart.c
>>> index ba3a7a25dda7..e40f852d42c1 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/quickstart.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/quickstart.c
>>> @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
>>>   #include <linux/input/sparse-keymap.h>
>>>   #include <linux/kernel.h>
>>>   #include <linux/module.h>
>>> +#include <linux/mutex.h>
>>>   #include <linux/platform_device.h>
>>>   #include <linux/sysfs.h>
>>>   #include <linux/types.h>
>>> @@ -35,6 +36,7 @@
>>>
>>>   struct quickstart_data {
>>>       struct device *dev;
>>> +    struct mutex input_lock;    /* Protects input sequence during notify */
>>>       struct input_dev *input_device;
>>>       char input_name[32];
>>>       char phys[32];
>>> @@ -73,7 +75,10 @@ static void quickstart_notify(acpi_handle handle, u32 event, void *context)
>>>
>>>       switch (event) {
>>>       case QUICKSTART_EVENT_RUNTIME:
>>> +        mutex_lock(&data->input_lock);
>>>           sparse_keymap_report_event(data->input_device, 0x1, 1, true);
>>> +        mutex_unlock(&data->input_lock);
>>> +
>>>           acpi_bus_generate_netlink_event(DRIVER_NAME, dev_name(data->dev), event, 0);
>>>           break;
>>>       default:
>>> @@ -147,6 +152,13 @@ static void quickstart_notify_remove(void *context)
>>>       acpi_remove_notify_handler(handle, ACPI_DEVICE_NOTIFY, quickstart_notify);
>>>   }
>>>
>>> +static void quickstart_mutex_destroy(void *data)
>>> +{
>>> +    struct mutex *lock = data;
>>> +
>>> +    mutex_destroy(lock);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>>   static int quickstart_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>   {
>>>       struct quickstart_data *data;
>>> @@ -165,6 +177,11 @@ static int quickstart_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>       data->dev = &pdev->dev;
>>>       dev_set_drvdata(&pdev->dev, data);
>>>
>>> +    mutex_init(&data->input_lock);
>>> +    ret = devm_add_action_or_reset(&pdev->dev, quickstart_mutex_destroy, &data->input_lock);
>>> +    if (ret < 0)
>>> +        return ret;
>>> +
>>>       /* We have to initialize the device wakeup before evaluating GHID because
>>>        * doing so will notify the device if the button was used to wake the machine
>>>        * from S5.
>>> --
>>> 2.39.2
>>>
>>>
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2024-05-27 16:28    [W:0.086 / U:0.112 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site