linux-kernel - Re: suspend blockers & Android integration

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:	Sun, 6 Jun 2010 02:04:46 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>
cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, tytso@....edu,
	Brian Swetland <swetland@...gle.com>,
	Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>,
	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
	Felipe Balbi <felipe.balbi@...ia.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org>,
	Linux OMAP Mailing List <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux PM <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...prootsystems.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: suspend blockers & Android integration

On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
> 2010/6/5 Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>:
> > On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
> >> >> > That download might take a minute or two, but that's not an
> >> >> > justification for the crapplication to run unconfined and prevent
> >> >> > lower power states.
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> I agree, but this is not a simple problem to solve.
> >> >
> >> > Not with suspend blockers, but with cgroup confinement of crap, it's
> >> > straight forward.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I don't think is is straight forward. If the a process in the frozen
> >> group holds a resource that a process in the unfrozen group needs, how
> >> do deal with that?
> >
> > I'm going to fix the framework which puts the group into freeze state
> > w/o making sure that there is no held shared resource. Come on it's
> > not rocket science.
> >
> 
> I'm not sure which framework you are talking about here, but I don't
> think there is a single framework that knows about all shared
> resources.

Damn, it's not me talking about "our framework", you are mentioning
when it fits your needs.

If you do not have a clearly defined user space framework, then we
talk about a completely random conglomeration of applications which
need to be brought into submission by some global brute force
approach.

I'm tired of this, really. You just use terminlology as it fits to
defend the complete design failure of android. But you fail to trick
me :)

Can you please explain in a consistent way how the application stack
and the underlying framework (which exists according to android docs)
is handling events and how the separation of trust level works ?

We need to know that, otherwise we turn in circles forever.

Thanks,

	tglx