linux-kernel - Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)

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:	Tue, 24 Apr 2007 23:29:56 +0200
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Nigel Cunningham <nigel@...el.suspend2.net>,
	Christian Hesse <mail@...thworm.de>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org>,
	suspend2-devel@...ts.suspend2.net,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)

Hi!

> > I have not a frigging clue whether that is the case in suspend2 vs 
> > uswsusp, but I object to this idiotic argument of counting "kernel 
> > code". That's simply not a valid argument. It never was.
> 
> the raw linecount appears to be the following:
> 
>  suspend2-2.2.9.12-for-2.6.21-rc6.patch
> 
>    89 files changed, 16452 insertions(+), 69 deletions(-)
> 
>  $ suspend-0.5> countlines
>  32260

(I'm getting very different numbers here. Userland part:)

pavel@amd:~/sf/suspend$ wc -l *.c
   125 bootsplash.c
    12 breakit.c
   119 config.c
   136 delme.c
   207 dmidecode.c
    92 encrypt.c
   222 keygen.c
   447 md5.c
   286 radeontool.c
   870 resume.c
   434 s2ram.c
    78 splash.c
    73 splashy_funcs.c
  1481 suspend.c
   117 swap-offset.c
    11 vfork_test.c
   123 vt.c
   413 whitelist.c
   136 whitelist2.c
  5382 total
pavel@amd:~/sf/suspend$ wc -l *.h
    23 bootsplash.h
    26 config.h
    62 encrypt.h
   106 md5.h
  1764 radeon_reg.h
    20 s2ram.h
    26 splash.h
    25 splashy_funcs.h
   217 swsusp.h
    10 vt.h
  2279 total
pavel@amd:~/sf/suspend$

> so, while it's probably apples to oranges, uswsusp seems to be larger, 
> while there's at least one feature that it is missing.

(We are talking "save 100% memory" here).

As I said, that one feature is doable in uswsusp, too. It is 200
lines. It also makes mm <-> swsusp interaction _way_ more complex, and
noone was able to review it. It will corrupt memory if we got it
wrong.

(Suspend2 has the same problem. It includes that same feature, and
noone is able to review it. It has few more problems.).

> also, from the structure of the suspend2 patch it seemed to me that they 
> could peacefully coexist in the kernel without stepping on each other's 
> toes - why not do that? Users will then pick the winner.

We do not want to fragment the testing base, and suspend2 does not
really have any interesting features over uswsusp.
								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
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/