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: <20070426103051.GP17387@elf.ucw.cz>
Date:	Thu, 26 Apr 2007 12:30:51 +0200
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org>,
	suspend2-devel@...ts.suspend2.net, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Subject: Re: suspend2 merge (was Re: [Suspend2-devel] Re: CFS and suspend2: hang in atomic copy)

On Thu 2007-04-26 12:17:12, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-04-24 at 23:24 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> 
> > I believe uswsusp user/kernel separation is clean enough. Kernel
> > provides "snapshot image" and "resume image". (Thanks go to Rafael for
> > very clean interface).
> 
> The interface isn't even 64/32-bit compatible...

Which parts?

read/write on /dev/snapshot looks ok.

ioctl(SNAPSHOT_FREEZE, UNFREEZE, ATOMIC_RESTORE, FREE, FREE_SWAP_PAGE,
	SNAPSHOT_S2RAM,
	is okay, because it does not pass any data.

ioctl(ATOMIC_SNAPSHOT,
	returns 0/1 through pointer. Should be ok. (Maybe we should do 

		if (!error)
			error = put_user(in_suspend, (u32 __user *)arg);

	...instead, to make it very explicit?

ioctl(SET_IMAGE_SIZE,
	is okay, because it just uses arg directly.

ioctl(PMOPS,
	is okay, because it just uses arg directly... and it is in
	range 0-3 or something.

ioctl(AVAIL_SWAP,
	...hmm, is this the one you are complaining about? It returns
	loff_t through a pointer.  Maybe there's another interface
	that can return available swap, and we should use that, instead?

ioctl(GET_SWAP_PAGE,
	returns sector_t through a pointer. NOt sure if that's good
	idea, either.

ioctl(SET_SWAP_FILE,
	does old_decode_dev(arg). Is that ok?

ioctl(SET_SWAP_AREA,
	shares struct resume_swap_area between user and kernel. I
	guess that's bad..?
									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/