linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] 8250: Don't restore NS16550 mode when console suspend is 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Wed, 13 May 2009 18:04:36 +0000
From:	Deepak Saxena <dsaxena@...xity.net>
To:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 8250: Don't restore NS16550 mode when console suspend
	is disabled

On May 13 2009, at 16:35, Alan Cox was caught saying:
> Deepak's original patch from 2008 is actually much better. He puts the
> chip back in the right hardware configuration for the speed. He doesn't
> randomly regress other platforms and configurations and he does it by
> calling the standard methods in the driver to do the job.
> 
> http://dev.laptop.org/~dsaxena/patches/console_suspend_old.patch
> 
> It also has another advantage - it fixes the behaviour for almost
> everything in drivers/serial not just a specific uart. Technically he
> should take tty->termios_mutex before state->mutex in that code path as
> the upstream code has changed but in every other respect its the proper
> solution.

I thought the fact that we were touching a core driver to fix what
seemed like an XO issue was too intrusive.

> So can we apply Deepak's original correct 2008 patch instead please ?

I've updated it with proper header and attached.

~Deepak


View attachment "restore_console_settings_on_suspend.patch" of type "text/x-diff" (2150 bytes)