linux-kernel - Re: [linux-pm] Re: [Resend][PATCH] PM: Fix dependencies of CONFIG_SUSPEND 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]

Message-Id: <1186399362.28655.72.camel@johannes.berg>
Date:	Mon, 06 Aug 2007 13:22:42 +0200
From:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>,
	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	pm list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	Russell King <rmk@....linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] Re: [Resend][PATCH] PM: Fix dependencies of
	CONFIG_SUSPEND and CONFIG_HIBERNATION (updated)

On Mon, 2007-08-06 at 13:15 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:

> config SUSPEND_UP_POSSIBLE
> 	depends on ARCH_SUSPEND_UP_POSSIBLE
> 
> and then the architecture gets to define that when it can suspend.

In fact, just doing
	depends on (ARCH_SUSPEND_UP_POSSIBLE && !SMP) || (ARCH_SUSPEND_SMP_POSSIBLE && SMP)

would probably be good instead of doing the intermediate
SUSPEND_UP_POSSIBLE and SUSPEND_SMP_POSSIBLE. The reason I like this
better is that we don't have a central editing point where patches
conflict causing unnecessary problems. But both are much better than
what we have now anyway :)

johannes

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (191 bytes)