| 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: <453DFBFF.8040001@s5r6.in-berlin.de> Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:41:51 +0200 From: Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de> To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org> CC: linux1394-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, linuxppc-dev list <linuxppc-dev@...abs.org>, Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com> Subject: Re: pci_set_power_state() failure and breaking suspend Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > Well, the question is wether we want to make the whole machine suspend > fail because there is a 1394 chip that doesn't do PCI PM in or not... > > I can send patches "fixing" it both ways (just ignoring the result from > pci_set_power_state in general, or just ignoring that result on Apple > cells). Yes, what would be the correct way to do this? And if it the latter option, should that be implemented in ohci1394 or in pci_set_power_state? grep says that almost nobody checks the return code of pci_set_power_state. But e.g. usb/core/hcd-pci.c does... (Side note: The sole function that ohci1394's suspend and resume hooks fulfill right now in mainline is to change power consumption of the chip. The IEEE 1394 stack as a whole does not survive suspend + resume yet. A still incomplete solution is in linux1394-2.6.git.) -- Stefan Richter -=====-=-==- =-=- ==--- http://arcgraph.de/sr/ - 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