linux-kernel - Re: ACPI power off regression in 2.6.23-rc8 (NOT in rc7)

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 26 Sep 2007 22:59:56 +0800
From:	Tim Post <echo@...oreply.us>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Damien Wyart <damien.wyart@...e.fr>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Frans Pop <elendil@...net.nl>,
	Alexey Starikovskiy <astarikovskiy@...e.de>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ACPI power off regression in 2.6.23-rc8 (NOT in rc7)

Bah, its too damn stable. Break it and do it again.

>>From 2.6.20.3 :

Boot time cut in half.
My PC no longer 'wakes up' angrily. My wife does that, I'm going to
start sleeping with the P4, its more agreeable now.

P4 HT with generic Intel chipset.

What fun is this when nothing breaks?

Thank you all :)

On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 08:40 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 08:51:09 +0200 Damien Wyart <damien.wyart@...e.fr> wrote:
> > 
> > Hello,
> > 
> > After testing rc8, I noticed that I couldn't power off the computer
> > directly, it only got halted and I had to press the power button
> > manually. Just before displaying "System halted", the following message
> > is displayed:
> > 
> >   ACPI : PCI interrupt for device 0000:02:08.0 disabled
> > 
> > I had to first revert 5a50fe709d527f31169263e36601dd83446d5744 then
> > f216cc3748a3a22c2b99390fddcdafa0583791a2 (handling of Sx states) to
> > recover previous behaviour.
> 
> Hmm. Those things *do* seem to be suspicious.
> 
> For example, those commits seem to move code that used to be inside 
> CONFIG_PM (which pretty much *everybody* has) to be inside 
> CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP (which is a totally different thing, and depends on 
> whether the user asked for suspend support or not!
> 
> Damien - does it work if you ask for SUSPEND or HIBERNATION support?
> 
> Len - why are you guys moving stuff into CONFIG_PM_SLEEP? I know you seem 
> to think that absolutely *everybody* should always support suspend and 
> hibernation, but the fact is, not everybody does. And it's a totally 
> separate thing for normal ACPI CPU runstate support that people have used 
> to manage a *running* CPU (and shutting it down).
> 
> 		Linus
> -
> 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/

-
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/