| Message ID | 1340007500-17169-1-git-send-email-colin.king@canonical.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Colin King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote: > From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > > It seems that the kernel is quite happy to handle RSDT and XSDT tables that > fail on their checksum checks, so lets not fail these as critical failures > anymore. > > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > --- > src/acpi/checksum/checksum.c | 41 +++++++---------------------------------- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/src/acpi/checksum/checksum.c b/src/acpi/checksum/checksum.c > index 264e7d0..9918a62 100644 > --- a/src/acpi/checksum/checksum.c > +++ b/src/acpi/checksum/checksum.c > @@ -89,16 +89,6 @@ static void checksum_rsdp(fwts_framework *fw, fwts_acpi_table_info *table) > > } > > -/* > - * The following tables the kernel requires the checksum to be valid otherwise > - * it will not load them, so checksum failures here are considered critical errors. > - */ > -static char *critical_checksum[] = { > - "RSDT", > - "XSDT", > - NULL > -}; > - > static int checksum_scan_tables(fwts_framework *fw) > { > int i; > @@ -131,35 +121,18 @@ static int checksum_scan_tables(fwts_framework *fw) > fwts_passed(fw, "Table %s has correct checksum 0x%x.", > table->name, hdr->checksum); > else { > - int i; > - int log_level = LOG_LEVEL_LOW; > - > - for (i = 0; critical_checksum[i]; i++) { > - if (!strcmp(table->name, critical_checksum[i])) { > - log_level = LOG_LEVEL_CRITICAL; > - break; > - } > - } > - > - fwts_failed(fw, log_level, "ACPITableChecksum", > + fwts_failed(fw, LOG_LEVEL_MEDIUM, "ACPITableChecksum", > "Table %s has incorrect checksum, " > "expected 0x%2.2x, got 0x%2.2x.", > table->name, (uint8_t)(hdr->checksum-checksum), > hdr->checksum); > > - /* Give some contextual explanation of the error */ > - if (log_level == LOG_LEVEL_CRITICAL) > - fwts_advice(fw, > - "The kernel requires this table to have a " > - "valid checksum and will not load it. This " > - "will lead to ACPI not working correctly."); > - else > - fwts_advice(fw, > - "The kernel will warn that this table has " > - "an invalid checksum but will ignore the " > - "error and still load it. This is not a " > - "critical issue, but should be fixed if " > - "possible to avoid the warning messages."); > + fwts_advice(fw, > + "The kernel will warn that this table has " > + "an invalid checksum but will ignore the " > + "error and still load it. This is not a " > + "critical issue, but should be fixed if " > + "possible to avoid the warning messages."); > > fwts_tag_failed(fw, FWTS_TAG_ACPI_TABLE_CHECKSUM); > } > -- > 1.7.10.4 > Acked-by: Keng-Yu Lin <kengyu@canonical.com>
Hi Colin, Will you also update the checksum testcase patch too? cheers, -kengyu
On 06/18/2012 04:18 PM, Colin King wrote: > From: Colin Ian King<colin.king@canonical.com> > > It seems that the kernel is quite happy to handle RSDT and XSDT tables that > fail on their checksum checks, so lets not fail these as critical failures > anymore. > > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King<colin.king@canonical.com> > --- > src/acpi/checksum/checksum.c | 41 +++++++---------------------------------- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/src/acpi/checksum/checksum.c b/src/acpi/checksum/checksum.c > index 264e7d0..9918a62 100644 > --- a/src/acpi/checksum/checksum.c > +++ b/src/acpi/checksum/checksum.c > @@ -89,16 +89,6 @@ static void checksum_rsdp(fwts_framework *fw, fwts_acpi_table_info *table) > > } > > -/* > - * The following tables the kernel requires the checksum to be valid otherwise > - * it will not load them, so checksum failures here are considered critical errors. > - */ > -static char *critical_checksum[] = { > - "RSDT", > - "XSDT", > - NULL > -}; > - > static int checksum_scan_tables(fwts_framework *fw) > { > int i; > @@ -131,35 +121,18 @@ static int checksum_scan_tables(fwts_framework *fw) > fwts_passed(fw, "Table %s has correct checksum 0x%x.", > table->name, hdr->checksum); > else { > - int i; > - int log_level = LOG_LEVEL_LOW; > - > - for (i = 0; critical_checksum[i]; i++) { > - if (!strcmp(table->name, critical_checksum[i])) { > - log_level = LOG_LEVEL_CRITICAL; > - break; > - } > - } > - > - fwts_failed(fw, log_level, "ACPITableChecksum", > + fwts_failed(fw, LOG_LEVEL_MEDIUM, "ACPITableChecksum", > "Table %s has incorrect checksum, " > "expected 0x%2.2x, got 0x%2.2x.", > table->name, (uint8_t)(hdr->checksum-checksum), > hdr->checksum); > > - /* Give some contextual explanation of the error */ > - if (log_level == LOG_LEVEL_CRITICAL) > - fwts_advice(fw, > - "The kernel requires this table to have a " > - "valid checksum and will not load it. This " > - "will lead to ACPI not working correctly."); > - else > - fwts_advice(fw, > - "The kernel will warn that this table has " > - "an invalid checksum but will ignore the " > - "error and still load it. This is not a " > - "critical issue, but should be fixed if " > - "possible to avoid the warning messages."); > + fwts_advice(fw, > + "The kernel will warn that this table has " > + "an invalid checksum but will ignore the " > + "error and still load it. This is not a " > + "critical issue, but should be fixed if " > + "possible to avoid the warning messages."); > > fwts_tag_failed(fw, FWTS_TAG_ACPI_TABLE_CHECKSUM); > } Acked-by: Alex Hung <alex.hung@canonical.com>
On 19/06/12 03:31, Keng-Yu Lin wrote: > Hi Colin, > Will you also update the checksum testcase patch too? > > cheers, > -kengyu > Will do. Colin
diff --git a/src/acpi/checksum/checksum.c b/src/acpi/checksum/checksum.c index 264e7d0..9918a62 100644 --- a/src/acpi/checksum/checksum.c +++ b/src/acpi/checksum/checksum.c @@ -89,16 +89,6 @@ static void checksum_rsdp(fwts_framework *fw, fwts_acpi_table_info *table) } -/* - * The following tables the kernel requires the checksum to be valid otherwise - * it will not load them, so checksum failures here are considered critical errors. - */ -static char *critical_checksum[] = { - "RSDT", - "XSDT", - NULL -}; - static int checksum_scan_tables(fwts_framework *fw) { int i; @@ -131,35 +121,18 @@ static int checksum_scan_tables(fwts_framework *fw) fwts_passed(fw, "Table %s has correct checksum 0x%x.", table->name, hdr->checksum); else { - int i; - int log_level = LOG_LEVEL_LOW; - - for (i = 0; critical_checksum[i]; i++) { - if (!strcmp(table->name, critical_checksum[i])) { - log_level = LOG_LEVEL_CRITICAL; - break; - } - } - - fwts_failed(fw, log_level, "ACPITableChecksum", + fwts_failed(fw, LOG_LEVEL_MEDIUM, "ACPITableChecksum", "Table %s has incorrect checksum, " "expected 0x%2.2x, got 0x%2.2x.", table->name, (uint8_t)(hdr->checksum-checksum), hdr->checksum); - /* Give some contextual explanation of the error */ - if (log_level == LOG_LEVEL_CRITICAL) - fwts_advice(fw, - "The kernel requires this table to have a " - "valid checksum and will not load it. This " - "will lead to ACPI not working correctly."); - else - fwts_advice(fw, - "The kernel will warn that this table has " - "an invalid checksum but will ignore the " - "error and still load it. This is not a " - "critical issue, but should be fixed if " - "possible to avoid the warning messages."); + fwts_advice(fw, + "The kernel will warn that this table has " + "an invalid checksum but will ignore the " + "error and still load it. This is not a " + "critical issue, but should be fixed if " + "possible to avoid the warning messages."); fwts_tag_failed(fw, FWTS_TAG_ACPI_TABLE_CHECKSUM); }