linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] Introduce CONFIG_HIBERNATION and CONFIG

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]

Date:	Mon, 30 Jul 2007 09:25:59 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, david@...g.hm,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>,
	Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>,
	Nigel Cunningham <nigel@...el.suspend2.net>,
	pm list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Introduce CONFIG_HIBERNATION and CONFIG_SUSPEND (updated)

On Monday, 30 July 2007 02:21, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> Ok, I took this, and modified Len's patch to re-introduce ACPI_SLEEP on 
> top of it (I took the easy way out, and just made PM_SLEEP imply 
> ACPI_SLEEP, which should make everything come out right. I could have 
> dropped ACPI_SLEEP entirely in favour of PM_SLEEP, but that would have 
> implied changing more of Len's patch than I was really comfy with).
> 
> Len, Rafael, please do check that the end result looks ok. 

I only found two really minor issues covered by the appended patch (on top of
the current -git).

> I suspect ACPI could now take the PM_SLEEP/SUSPEND/HIBERNATE details into 
> account, and that some of the code is not necessary when HIBERNATE is not 
> selected, for example, but I'm not at all sure that it's worth it being 
> very fine-grained.

Well, IMO, for now let's make sure everything works as is. :-)

Greetings,
Rafael


---
(1) I think it's better to use CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP instead of CONFIG_PM_SLEEP in
    include/acpi/acpi_bus.h , too, for consistency.

(2) x86_64 defconfig is outdated

Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl>
---
 arch/x86_64/defconfig   |    3 ---
 include/acpi/acpi_bus.h |    6 +++---
 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

Index: linux-2.6/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h	2007-07-30 07:58:48.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-2.6/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h	2007-07-30 08:25:32.000000000 +0200
@@ -366,16 +366,16 @@ acpi_handle acpi_get_child(acpi_handle, 
 acpi_handle acpi_get_pci_rootbridge_handle(unsigned int, unsigned int);
 #define DEVICE_ACPI_HANDLE(dev) ((acpi_handle)((dev)->archdata.acpi_handle))
 
-#ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP
+#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP
 int acpi_pm_device_sleep_state(struct device *, int, int *);
-#else /* !CONFIG_PM_SLEEP */
+#else /* !CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP */
 static inline int acpi_pm_device_sleep_state(struct device *d, int w, int *p)
 {
 	if (p)
 		*p = ACPI_STATE_D0;
 	return ACPI_STATE_D3;
 }
-#endif /* !CONFIG_PM_SLEEP */
+#endif /* !CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP */
 
 #endif				/* CONFIG_ACPI */
 
Index: linux-2.6/arch/x86_64/defconfig
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/arch/x86_64/defconfig	2007-07-30 07:58:48.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-2.6/arch/x86_64/defconfig	2007-07-30 08:27:27.000000000 +0200
@@ -207,9 +207,6 @@ CONFIG_SUSPEND_SMP=y
 # ACPI (Advanced Configuration and Power Interface) Support
 #
 CONFIG_ACPI=y
-CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP=y
-CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP_PROC_FS=y
-CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP_PROC_SLEEP=y
 CONFIG_ACPI_PROCFS=y
 CONFIG_ACPI_AC=y
 CONFIG_ACPI_BATTERY=y
-
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/