linux-kernel - Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)

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: <20070425200836.GB17387@elf.ucw.cz>
Date:	Wed, 25 Apr 2007 22:08:36 +0200
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Nigel Cunningham <nigel@...el.suspend2.net>,
	Christian Hesse <mail@...thworm.de>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org>,
	suspend2-devel@...ts.suspend2.net,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)

Hi!

> > > .. but if the alternative is a feature that just isn't worth it, and 
> > > likely to not only have its own bugs, but cause bugs elsewhere? (And yes, 
> > > I believe STD is both of those. There's a reason it's called "STD". Go 
> > > to google and type "STD" and press "I'm feeling lucky". Google is God).
> > 
> > Is there really no use case for STD?
> 
> People seem to have reading comprehension problems.
> 
> The STD code is buggy, and has introduced bugs in STR too, largely thanks 
> to bad design. Some of them have happily gotten fixed. Others did not, and 
> now we have three totally different versions (two of which share some 
> infrastructure), all of which are broken (ie the "suspend2" people will 
> swear up-and-down that swsusp doesn't work for them, but anybody who 
> thinks that "suspend2" will work for everybody is just being a total 
> idiot, and I have a bridge to sell to them).

Well, lets get some credit to STD... it worked before STR, and it
allowed debugging basic driver infrastructure. 

> So my objections to STD have nothing to do with saving state and shutting 
> down. They have everything to do with the fact that it is not - and will 
> never be - a "suspend", and it shouldn't affect suspend.

STD needs to snapshot system, and then it needs devices to be
suspended so that snapshot is consistent.

> And that's a *fundamental* problem. If the STD people cannot even realize 
> that they have less to do with "suspend" than to "reboot", how do you ever 
> expect them to get anything to work, and not affect other things 
> negatively?

STD worked first ;-). Yes, these days it has little to do with
"suspend", it was mostly separated to "snapshot" and "restore".

We still keep swsusp in kernel for compatibility (and because it makes
debugging very easy).
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
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/