| 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: <200707040046.10856.rjw@sisk.pl> Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 00:46:10 +0200 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl> To: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org> Cc: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH] Remove process freezer from suspend to RAM pathway On Tuesday, 3 July 2007 23:36, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 11:37:51PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Tuesday, 3 July 2007 23:20, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > > We're used to the idea of applications blocking when a resource they're > > > using goes away - NFS has done it forever. > > > > Now, please tell me how many driver writers even thought that something > > might try to access their devices after .suspend() had been executed (or > > even whilie it was being executed)? > > Every single driver that fails under those conditions is already broken, > and has been forever. It's likely that they're broken under run-time > suspend, too. Well, I won't argue with that, but do you actually know how many drivers are broken this way? Greetings, Rafael -- "Premature optimization is the root of all evil." - Donald Knuth - 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