linux-kernel - Re: [linux-pm] [3/6] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 29 Mar 2007 00:26:18 +0200
From:	Maxim <maximlevitsky@...il.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>,
	linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	Jeff Chua <jeff.chua.linux@...il.com>,
	linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, gregkh@...e.de, linux-pm@...ts.osdl.org,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pci@...ey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...lanox.co.il>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, jgarzik@...ox.com,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [3/6] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions

On Wednesday 28 March 2007 22:42:00 Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, David Brownell wrote:
> >
> > On Wednesday 28 March 2007 9:38 am, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > 
> > > It's a *device*, dammit. It should save and resume like one (probably as a 
> > > system device). The "set_mode()" etc stuff is at a completely different 
> > > (higher) conceptual level.
> > 
> > Agreed, except about "probably as a system device".
> > 
> > Last I checked, there was no good reason to use sysdev suspend()/resume()
> > rather than platform_device suspend_late()/early_resume().  Which more
> > or less means no good reason to use sysdev in new code...
> 
> I won't disagree - it might well be much nicer to just show it in the 
> "real" device tree. I'm not 100% sure where in the tree it would go, 
> though. It should probably be "inside" the root entry, before any of the 
> PCI buses. It's generally what we've used those "system device" things 
> for, but I agree that it would be better to just make system devices show 
> up early on the regular device list than it is to have them be special 
> cases.
> 
> Bit I think that's a separate (and fairly small) issue compared to the 
> "don't use the clocksource infrastructure as a make-believe suspend/resume 
> mechanism" problem that Maxim's patch had.
> 
> (Maxim, don't take that the wrong way - I think your analysis and patch 
> were great, I just think another organization would be better)

Exactly, I agree completely
I said that my patch was a  temporary fix, and I agree that the best way is to create a new system device
and use its suspend/resume hooks to bring HPET back to life on resume.

> 
> > Also, making HPET use the legacy mode seems like a step backwards.
> 
> I don't think that's actually "legacy" in any sense but the interrupt 
> delivery, where the "legacy mode" bit is not so much that the HPET itself 
> is "legacy" but that it *replaces* legacy devices.
> 
> But I may have misunderstood the thing. I'm an old fart, so I know the old 
> timers much better than I know the new ones ;). Somebody feel free to hit 
> me with the clue-2x4.
> 
> 			Linus
> 

Best regards,
	Maxim Levitsky
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/