linux-kernel - Re: [TuxOnIce-devel] [RFC] TuxOnIce

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]

Date:	Wed, 27 May 2009 07:29:20 +1000
From:	Nigel Cunningham <nigel@...onice.net>
To:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org>,
	linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	tuxonice-devel@...ts.tuxonice.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [TuxOnIce-devel] [RFC] TuxOnIce

Hi.

On Tue, 2009-05-26 at 11:19 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > > If you really have drivers that have exceptionally large memory requirements
> > > (eg. you need to copy video ram), you should tell the system through struct
> > > driver and do accounting at probe and removal of devices.
> > 
> > Or perhaps the drivers should allocate memory from a PM notifier (which is
> > called before the freezing of tasks) to avoid the problem?
> 
> Yes, that's how it should work for big allocations.
> 
> For small allocations... I still believe we should free a bit of
> memory for s2ram so that small allocations can be done without
> problems.

Big vs small shouldn't matter. One simple, clear method of doing things.
Otherwise we won't get the predictability we're seeking.

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/