linux-kernel - Re: pcmcia resume 60 second hang. Re: [patch 00/69] -stable review

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: <1180476604.20718.50.camel@nigel.suspend2.net>
Date:	Wed, 30 May 2007 08:10:04 +1000
From:	Nigel Cunningham <nigel@...el.suspend2.net>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Mark Lord <lkml@....ca>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	Romano Giannetti <romanol@...omillas.es>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
	Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	stable@...nel.org, Justin Forbes <jmforbes@...uxtx.org>,
	Zwane Mwaikambo <zwane@....linux.org.uk>,
	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	Chuck Wolber <chuckw@...ntumlinux.com>,
	Chris Wedgwood <reviews@...cw.f00f.org>,
	Michael Krufky <mkrufky@...uxtv.org>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Subject: Re: pcmcia resume 60 second hang. Re: [patch 00/69] -stable review

Hi.

On Tue, 2007-05-29 at 14:33 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 30 May 2007, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, 2007-05-29 at 10:19 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> > > 
> > > How about blocking brk() and mmap(MAP_ANONYMOUS) in addition to
> > > the filesystem VFS callers?   Or is that starting to get messy again?
> > 
> > Yeah. Getting messy again :)
> 
> Indeed. And also misses the point - the point being that we don't actually 
> need to freeze anything at all most of the time. There's nothing wrong 
> with making memory allocations etc.
> 
> And yes, suspend is different from hibernate. I can see how hibernate 
> people are worried about people writing to things after doing the 
> snapshot, but those concerns don't exist with suspend. With suspend, the 
> biggest concern is accessing a device after it has been suspended, but on 
> the other hand, also the fact that we end up having driver writers used 
> to the system being "runnable", so they do things that really do require a 
> full-fledged system (and sometimes that means just some delayed action 
> using a kernel thread, other times it seems to rely on more complex 
> behaviour like firmware loading :^p )

Yeah, but they can't. Even after the freezing of processes has been
removed from the normal suspend to ram path, we're still going to have
this issue with the suspend to ram after writing a hibernation image
path.

Regards,

Nigel

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (190 bytes)