linux-kernel - Re: [linux-pm][PATCH] base: Change power/wakeup output from "" to "unsupported" if wakeup feature isn't supported by a device

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: <200801061949.44408.david-b@pacbell.net>
Date:	Sun, 6 Jan 2008 19:49:43 -0800
From:	David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>
To:	yi.y.yang@...el.com
Cc:	Olivier Galibert <galibert@...ox.com>,
	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>, pavel@....cz,
	linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [linux-pm][PATCH] base: Change power/wakeup output from "" to "unsupported" if wakeup feature isn't supported by a device

On Sunday 06 January 2008, Yi Yang wrote:
> 
> > How about not changing a userland-visible interface gratuitously?
>
> "empty" can't tell a user the state of wakeup of a device, so it is
> necessary to change it.

Words don't say anything at all in isolation.  For example,
here the current tristate behavior has been documented for
several years now ... and that's the only thing that could
have conveyed any meaning whatever.

I can't agree that it's even slightly "necessary" to make
such a grutuitous and backwards-incompatible change.


--
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/