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:	Mon, 23 Mar 2009 15:15:57 +0800
From:	Li Yang <leoli@...escale.com>
To:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: nonboot cpu on SMP suspend

On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 2:58 AM, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> wrote:
> On Wed 2009-03-18 14:25:32, Li Yang wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm curious why we need to un-plug all the nonboot cpus before suspend
>> and start them all over again after the suspend(ACPI sleep)?  I mean
>> if we can bring the booting cpu back to the exact state as before
>> suspend, why can't we just do the same for non-booting cpus?  And that
>> will be much faster.  Any thought?  Thanks.
>
> Why do you think it will be faster?

_cpu_down() and _cpu_up() are surely complex functions, involving
work_queues and synchronization between boot cpu and non-boot cpu.  On
the contrary, to bring the cpu back to previous state is much simpler.
 For standby state, you barely need to do anything.  For mem state,
you only need to restore the registers and states of the CPU.

- Leo
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ