linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] PCI: Suspend and resume PCI Express ports with interrupts disabled

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:	Sat, 6 Dec 2008 18:18:54 -0800
From:	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	pm list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] PCI: Suspend and resume PCI Express ports with interrupts disabled

On Saturday, December 6, 2008 9:46 am Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Saturday, 6 of December 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Sat, 6 Dec 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > I think it should go through Jesse?
> >
> > Probably correct. And we want it in -next, so that it can get some
> > testing even before I open the merge window. Because I hope everybody
> > realizes that there's no way we're doing this in 2.6.28, and we'll leave
> > the broken and unreliable suspend.
> >
> > Because afaik this is not a new bug (I tried to push a patch to do
> > suspend_late/resume_early for the PCI code a _loong_ time ago, but it
> > never got merged), and the only reason it showed up as a regression was
> > almost certainly simply that we've always had this.
> >
> > IOW, suspend/resume has always been dodgy wrt interrupts, and there's
> > some luck involved. And your machine just happened to get unlucky.
> >
> > I'd love to fix this in 2.6.28, but it's just not reasonable - it needs
> > widespread testing with an early -rc merge. And if it turns out to fix a
> > lot of machines, and there are no regressions, we can always back-port it
> > later.
>
> I agree.

I'll stuff it into my -next branch tonight.

-- 
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center

--
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/