linux-kernel - Re: [linux-pm] sleepy linux self-test

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 2 Feb 2008 14:50:37 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc:	David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>,
	linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] sleepy linux self-test


* Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> wrote:

> > Plus, the way you're doing it now is violating the locking protocol 
> > used by that driver.
> 
> Yep, you are right, but that is the easy issue to fix. There's hard 
> issue: I need
> 
> struct rtc_device *rtc
> 
> for the rtc that can be used for system resume, and I'd like to get it 
> without violating too many layers. How to do that?
> 
> Ideally, I need 
> 
> set_alarm(int)
> 
> ...that will magically pick the right rtc device to talk to, and set 
> alarm on it. I don't see how to implement it with current code.

i'd really love to have a /dev/rtc device compatibility APIs, both 
inside and outside the kernel. I really dont know why the new RTC code 
does not do it - why does it put up artificial anti-adoption barriers to 
make it harder to migrate to the new code?

	Ingo
--
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/