linux-kernel - Re: hibernate event order question

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: <20080517223622.GA2668@yamamaya.is-a-geek.org>
Date:	Sun, 18 May 2008 00:36:40 +0200
From:	Tobias Diedrich <ranma+kernel@...edrich.de>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Ayaz Abdulla <aabdulla@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: hibernate event order question

Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

> > Now for my question:
> > AFAICS the ordering of events is as follows:
> > 1) User reqests hibernate
> > 2) Tasks are frozen
> > 3) Device suspend callbacks get called
> > 4) Device resume callbacks get called
> > 5) Memory image is written to disk
> 
> 6) Device suspend callbacks get called again to prepare for the system sleep
>    state.

According to my pci postcard this is not the case.
I modified nv_suspend to wiggle port 0x80 with mdelay(100) between
0xa0/0x50 wiggles and mdelay(1000) before returning, so it is easily
countable.
nv_suspend is called only once per ethernet port (step 3 above).
I have not yet tried adding a suspend_late handler.

> > In my case, I think the fix for the first bug (promiscous mode does
> > not get restored on resume) breaks wake-on-lan (since the new value
> > of NvRegPacketFilterFlags may be incompatible with wake-on-lan).

I reconfirmed this.  Without the promiscous mode bugfix,
wake-on-lan (partially) works.  With the promiscous mode bugfix the
machine doesn't wake up.  This is also easily explainable by 6) not
happening. :)

> > Shouldn't there be a 'prepare for poweroff'-callback, which gets
> > called
> > before the system is powered off for real?
> 
> Yes, it should and it's called in recent kernels.

For what values of 'recent'?
I'm running 2.6.26-rc2 here. :)
How do I hook into this callback?
(suspend_late maybe? Going to try that one next...)

-- 
Tobias						PGP: http://9ac7e0bc.uguu.de
このメールは十割再利用されたビットで作られています。
--
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/