linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] PCI: Suspend and resume PCI Express ports with interrupts disabled

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: <200812061846.12167.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date:	Sat, 6 Dec 2008 18:46:11 +0100
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	pm list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] PCI: Suspend and resume PCI Express ports with interrupts disabled

On Saturday, 6 of December 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 6 Dec 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > 
> > I think it should go through Jesse?
> 
> Probably correct. And we want it in -next, so that it can get some testing 
> even before I open the merge window. Because I hope everybody realizes 
> that there's no way we're doing this in 2.6.28, and we'll leave the broken 
> and unreliable suspend.
> 
> Because afaik this is not a new bug (I tried to push a patch to do 
> suspend_late/resume_early for the PCI code a _loong_ time ago, but it 
> never got merged), and the only reason it showed up as a regression was 
> almost certainly simply that we've always had this.
> 
> IOW, suspend/resume has always been dodgy wrt interrupts, and there's some 
> luck involved. And your machine just happened to get unlucky.
> 
> I'd love to fix this in 2.6.28, but it's just not reasonable - it needs 
> widespread testing with an early -rc merge. And if it turns out to fix a 
> lot of machines, and there are no regressions, we can always back-port it 
> later.

I agree.

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/