linux-kernel - Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernation -v3: kexec jump

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: <200709212215.26978.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date:	Fri, 21 Sep 2007 22:15:25 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc:	Jeremy Maitin-Shepard <jbms@....edu>,
	Nigel Cunningham <nigel@...el.suspend2.net>,
	nigel@...pend2.net, Kexec Mailing List <kexec@...ts.infradead.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>,
	linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@...il.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernation -v3: kexec jump

On Friday, 21 September 2007 21:45, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Sep 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> 
> > > > Well, the problem is that apparently some systems (eg. my HP nx6325) expect us
> > > > to execute the _PTS ACPI global control method before creating the image _and_
> > > > to execute acpi_enter_sleep_state(ACPI_STATE_S4) in order to finally put the
> > > > system into the sleep state.  In particular, on nx6325, if we don't do that,
> > > > then after the restore the status of the AC power will not be reported
> > > > correctly (and if you replace the battery while in the sleep state, the
> > > > battery status will not be updated correctly after the restore).  Similar
> > > > issues have been reported for other machines.
> > > 
> > > Suppose that instead of using ACPI S4 state at all, you instead just
> > > power off.  Yes, you'll lose wakeup event functionality, and flashy
> > > LEDs, but doesn't this take care of the problem?
> > 
> > Nope.
> > 
> > > The firmware shouldn't see the hibernate as anything other than a shutdown
> > > and reboot.
> > 
> > Actually, this assumption is apparently wrong.
> 
> One gets the impression that the hibernation image includes a memory 
> area used by the firmware.  That could explain why devices need to be 
> in a low-power state when the image is created -- so that when the 
> image is restored, the firmware doesn't get confused about the device 
> states.
> 
> It would also explain why the firmware sees
> resume-from-power-off-hibernation as different from a regular reboot:
> because its data area gets overwritten as part of the resume.
> 
> In reality it's probably more complicated than this, with weird 
> interactions between the firmware and the various ACPI methods.  
> Nevertheless, the main idea seems valid.

I guess so, but I'm not sure.

The ACPI NVS area is explicitly marked as reserved and we don't save it.
On x86_64 we don't save any memory areas marked as reserved and yet the above
happens.

Greetings,
Rafael
-
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/