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: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 18:19:44 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...e.com> cc: linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [2.6.30-rc1-git2 regressions] Hibernation broken and (minor but annoying) audio problem On Sat, 11 Apr 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Friday 10 April 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > > On Fri, 10 Apr 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > > > I've just verified that the resume-after-hibernation issue goes away after > > > reverting commit 9710794383ee5008d67f1a6613a4717bf6de47bc > > > (async: remove the temporary (2.6.29) "async is off by default" code) , so it > > > is async-related. > > > > Arjan? Clearly all the necessary fixes weren't found.. > > > > There _is_ a module loading problem wrt initmem - I think you found that > > and we added a hack for it for the ACPI battery driver. I wonder if we're > > hitting a similar issue now with module discovery: modules that use > > "async_schedule()" to do their discovery asynchronously are now not > > necessarily fully "done" when the module is loaded. > > > > And so, anything that expected the devices to be available after module > > load (like they used to) would be screwed. > > > > IOW, maybe something like the totally untested patch appended here (that > > should also allow us to make the ACPI battery code to go back to using > > __init). > > I tested it and it worked. Hmm. I'm not 100% sure that patch is good. The reason? I think it's going to deadlock if an async caller ends up wanting to load a module, because then the nestecd "async_synchronize_full()" will basically want to wait for itself. So it's a good test-patch, and maybe no async caller ever loads a module, but it makes me a bit nervous. But the fact that it fixes things for you at least means that the _reason_ for the problem is know, and maybe there are alternative solutions. Arjan? Linus -- 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