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]
Message-ID: <20111205174349.GG627@google.com>
Date:	Mon, 5 Dec 2011 09:43:49 -0800
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	rjw@...k.pl, pavel@....cz, len.brown@...el.com,
	ebiederm@...ssion.com, rdunlap@...otime.net,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, kexec@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] PM / Docs: Recommend the use of
 [un]lock_system_sleep() over mutex_[un]lock(&pm_mutex)

Hello,

On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 11:08:38PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> Sorry, I didn't get what you meant here. Are you talking about what
> needs to be added/changed in the documentation or, are you referring
> to the code itself and are saying that we must make these APIs
> internal to the PM alone?

Ooh, sorry about not being clear.  I meant pm_mutex itself.  There's
no reason to expose that outside of pm, right?  And in the
documentation, we can just require use of the APIs instead of pm_mutex
itself.

Thank you.

-- 
tejun
--
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