Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless+bounces-8853-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.48.161 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.48.161;
Message-ID: <440b1e9e-cba7-4716-a78e-570dbc733606@quicinc.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2024 18:35:55 +0800
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] net: rfkill: Fix a logic error within
 rfkill_set_hw_state_reason()
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>, <davem@davemloft.net>,
        <edumazet@google.com>, <kuba@kernel.org>, <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        <emmanuel.grumbach@intel.com>
CC: <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>, <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
References: <1717771212-30723-1-git-send-email-quic_zijuhu@quicinc.com>
 <1717771212-30723-3-git-send-email-quic_zijuhu@quicinc.com>
 <c0ad3896334014ba2f12a7978b912e9c49b30d58.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Content-Language: en-US
From: quic_zijuhu <quic_zijuhu@quicinc.com>
In-Reply-To: <c0ad3896334014ba2f12a7978b912e9c49b30d58.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 6/12/2024 6:18 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Fri, 2024-06-07 at 22:40 +0800, Zijun Hu wrote:
>> Kernel API rfkill_set_hw_state_reason() wrongly gets previous block state
>> by using its parameter @reason as reason mask.
>>
>> Fixed by using @reason_mask as reason mask.
>>
> 
> Actually, this *introduces* a bug. I'll leave it to you to figure out
> what that is, I'm not convinced that you're actually doing *anything*
> useful here.
> 
i feels that current logic is weird and it is very difficult to
understand when i read rfkill code.

i think it deserves a comments for current logic if it is right.

current logic was introduced by below code applet of the commit
Commit: 14486c82612a ("rfkill: add a reason to the HW rfkill state")
-       prev = !!(rfkill->state & RFKILL_BLOCK_HW);
-       if (blocked)
+       prev = !!(rfkill->hard_block_reasons & reason);
+       if (blocked) {
                rfkill->state |= RFKILL_BLOCK_HW;

i maybe need to find history to try to understand current logic if it is
right.
> johannes