| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <200610080914.26315.oliver@neukum.org> Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2006 09:14:26 +0200 From: Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org> To: David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net> Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>, linux-usb-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [linux-usb-devel] error to be returned while suspended Am Sonntag, 8. Oktober 2006 02:03 schrieb David Brownell: > On Saturday 07 October 2006 10:16 am, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > > > > I dare say that the commonest scenario involving USB is a laptop with > > > > an input device attached. Input devices are for practical purposes always > > > > opened. A simple resume upon open and suspend upon close is useless. > > That is, the standard model is useless? I think you've made To be precise a simple implementation of autosuspend is useless. The idea can be expanded as I wrote if you care to read a bit further. But still I find the idea to have drawbacks for input devices. That is not to say that autosuspend is bad in all cases, but there are unavoidable cases in which it is not optimal, which leads me to conclude that suspension for a device must remain triggerable from user space. Regards Oliver - 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