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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 17:32:57 -0700 From: David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net> To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Stefan.Becker@...ia.com, rjw@...k.pl Subject: Re: [patch 2.6.27-rc4] rtc-cmos: wakes again from S5 On Thursday 28 August 2008, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 28 Aug 2008 11:29:35 -0700 > David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net> wrote: > > > + if (system_state == SYSTEM_POWER_OFF && !cmos_poweroff(pdev)) > > erp, system_state is a pretty horrid thing. It's a global with > relatively poorly defined transition conditions which have actually > changed over time. True, but it's the best we've got for this kind of thing. Globals ... yeech. > It was not my greatest ever idea. It was simple and expedient at the > time and expanded use of it was "discouraged" (rofl). > > Is there no alternative? My general belief is that there should be a set of predicates that drivers use to test whether or not the target system state satisfies various prerequisites. Like whether a clock or power domain must be disabled, and so on. In this specific case, a system_is_powering_down() predicate is the logical application of that policy to this problem. - Dave -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists