linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/3] PM: Introduce new top level suspend and hibernation callbacks (rev. 4)

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: <200803270054.58546.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date:	Thu, 27 Mar 2008 00:54:57 +0100
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	benh@...nel.crashing.org
Cc:	Alexey Starikovskiy <astarikovskiy@...e.de>,
	pm list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/3] PM: Introduce new top level suspend and hibernation callbacks (rev. 4)

On Thursday, 27 of March 2008, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 2008-03-27 at 02:27 +0300, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
> > Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > This is the 4th revision of the patch.
> > > + * struct pm_noirq_ops - device PM callbacks executed with interrupts disabled
> > > + *
> > > + * The following callbacks included in 'struct pm_noirq_ops' are executed with
> > > + * the nonboot CPUs switched off and with interrupts disabled on the only
> > > + * functional CPU.  They also are executed with the PM core list of devices
> > > + * locked, so they must NOT unregister any devices.
> > > + *
> > > + * @suspend_noirq: Complete the operations of ->suspend() by carrying out any
> > > + *	actions required for suspending the device that need interrupts to be
> > > + *	disabled
> > IMHO, no need to add _noirq in both struct and struct members.
> > pm_noirq->suspend_noirq does not look good...
>
> There is absolutely no point getting a second struct anymore.

I obviously disagree with that opinion, so please elaborate.

> BTW. I haven't had a chance to review the rest of the discussion on that
> thread yet, been busy with other things, I'll try to go back to it today
> or tomorrow.

OK

Thanks,
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/