From nobody Thu Oct 2 17:59:15 2025 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 879F618FC97; Fri, 12 Sep 2025 20:06:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757707581; cv=none; b=PeIFIkv9QkIfVXg4jwKx4+EjivKxfaxQJC9wl2SIsg2MNff/0xBclaKLc51rvPCxI015S7XLQ3ChPNGmb+Y+MGL/s4nyx2QgN7gFeAlf5XdoHlQeD815yTYDhHB5BtWTjzolo+26r1BKMyDonI9IiHM62Y8AQmzq2h1VcMAqPJQ= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757707581; c=relaxed/simple; bh=IuBHjL73ZskqapjpJTBNcNowJv/7joUhld3OQUr1nNw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=dnMG9mslYLEvn8bHU1+A26uh8SZ0X+OlYkvthAKfmbUIyM2rdHgzHY0oDMvzMlpt66sLKRqk4E65+6HjiRLx39IwZGR94g+DySs+DaFeP/Yqtzb37yH/hPgUbwC2jpHn9CuFfF6wMFDL/lnun24fxbVxp8rolu82IgLycPTgNh8= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=P2a8Lcrf; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="P2a8Lcrf" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BD35EC4CEF1; Fri, 12 Sep 2025 20:06:18 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1757707579; bh=IuBHjL73ZskqapjpJTBNcNowJv/7joUhld3OQUr1nNw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=P2a8LcrfRhvD7f9VZDhCWEEIzaQNPoKm+MFmD1lOFPZxZHCP1763r3GEmz534dbGl L9BwNSxsx4wtPPTPEKKj9jfMpeY0a/UzsyR0/xd5Bw/1W6fAQxUeHWCgnCYNRv9cn7 79Lbj6uKb+83j6fVT9JwsBZpWiev6TSy3rRTbBBEd5s4VmPA8tovFs4VRSUEFtzJzn +rbtEA8oU980vubUz2JifrpYZJYXJ0Q3voFpzulNkPclPrgr/qfXxqweMZ5lkGLgE6 Iq80+uwxQdcY1LQWmjeiaYgzfQoCG38HqArOMF8r23XUmi6bFm1Jf05ryVORPseSNl dDSa/tJzOSs5g== From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: Linux ACPI Cc: LKML , "Dumbre, Saket" Subject: [PATCH v1 16/16] ACPICA: acpidump: fix return values in ap_is_valid_checksum() Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2025 22:06:08 +0200 Message-ID: <15565189.tv2OnDr8pf@rafael.j.wysocki> Organization: Linux Kernel Development In-Reply-To: <2021361.PYKUYFuaPT@rafael.j.wysocki> References: <2021361.PYKUYFuaPT@rafael.j.wysocki> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" From: Kaushlendra Kumar The function ap_is_valid_checksum() has a boolean name suggesting it should return TRUE/FALSE, but incorrectly returns AE_OK on success and has no explicit return on failure, leading to undefined behavior. Fix by returning proper values: - FALSE when checksum validation fails - TRUE when checksum validation succeeds Link: https://github.com/acpica/acpica/commit/479ba862 Signed-off-by: Kaushlendra Kumar Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki --- tools/power/acpi/tools/acpidump/apdump.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/tools/power/acpi/tools/acpidump/apdump.c b/tools/power/acpi/to= ols/acpidump/apdump.c index bf30143efbdc..7a6223aa703c 100644 --- a/tools/power/acpi/tools/acpidump/apdump.c +++ b/tools/power/acpi/tools/acpidump/apdump.c @@ -86,9 +86,10 @@ u8 ap_is_valid_checksum(struct acpi_table_header *table) if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) { fprintf(stderr, "%4.4s: Warning: wrong checksum in table\n", table->signature); + return (FALSE); } =20 - return (AE_OK); + return (TRUE); } =20 /*************************************************************************= ***** --=20 2.51.0