linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.18 suspend regression on Intel Macs

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:	Tue, 10 Oct 2006 21:08:15 +0200
From:	Frédéric Riss <frederic.riss@...il.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>
Cc:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	len.brown@...el.com
Subject: Re: 2.6.18 suspend regression on Intel Macs

Le mardi 10 octobre 2006 à 08:33 -0700, Linus Torvalds a écrit :
> > If we do this we probably should at least key this of some DMI
> > identification for the mac mini..
> 
> No. That would be silly.
> 
> Having _conditional_ code is not only bigger, it's orders of magnitude 
> more complex and likely to break. It's much better to say: "We know at 
> least one machine needs this" than it is to say "We know machine X needs 
> this", because the latter has extra complexity that just doesn't buy you 
> anything.
> 
> It's much better to treat everybody the same, if that works. That way, you 
> don't have different code-paths.

So what's the plan? Should/Will the ACPI guys remove the bit-preserving
change brought in with the latest ACPICA merge?

Fred.

-
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/