linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] PM: Introduce new top level suspend and hibernation callbacks (rev. 6)

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: <1207085713.23143.111.camel@nigel-laptop>
Date:	Wed, 02 Apr 2008 08:35:13 +1100
From:	Nigel Cunningham <ncunningham@...a.org.au>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc:	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>,
	Alexey Starikovskiy <astarikovskiy@...e.de>,
	David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] PM: Introduce new top level suspend and
	hibernation callbacks (rev. 6)

Hi Rafael etc.

On Tue, 2008-04-01 at 22:12 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> 'ext' means 'extended'.  The idea is that the 'extended' version will be used
> by bus types / driver types that don't need to implement the _noirq callbacks.
> Both the platform and PCI bus types generally allow drivers to use _noirq
> callbacks, so they use 'struct pm_ext_ops', as well as their corresponding
> driver types.

Do you mean to say in the first sentence "...that _do_ need to
implement..."? If not, then extended sounds like a misnomer and the two
sentences seem to contradict one another.

[...]

> > > + *	However, drivers may NOT assume anything about the availability of the
> > > + *	user space at that time and it is not correct to request firmware from
> > > + *	within @prepare() (it's too late to do that).
> > 
> > That doesn't sound good. It would be good to be able to get drivers to
> > request firmware early in the process.
> 
> That will be possible when we drop the freezer.

Yeah, but right now, it seems to me to be a bogus limitation for drivers
to have no way of automatically loading firmware when you're about to
hibernate. (Of course I've since been reminded of the notifier chain -
that should probably be mentioned here as the way of achieving this).

By the way, I'm going to go on record now as saying I think dropping the
freezer is a silly idea. I'm therefore currently considering including
the freezer in TuxOnice from the time it gets dropped from mainline. I
know that will only make it less likely that TuxOnIce gets merged, but
I've given up caring about that anyway - caring about merging is
pointless when the people who decide if it gets merged don't care.

Regards,

Nigel

--
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/