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, 13 May 2010 23:56:21 +0200 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl> To: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com> Cc: Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com>, Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>, Paul Walmsley <paul@...an.com>, Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>, "Linux-pm mailing list" <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>, Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Kevin Hilman <khilman@...prootsystems.com>, magnus.damm@...il.com, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, mark gross <mgross@...ux.intel.com>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>, Geoff Smith <geoffx.smith@...el.com>, Brian Swetland <swetland@...gle.com>, Benoît Cousson <b-cousson@...com>, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, Vitaly Wool <vitalywool@...il.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>, Liam Girdwood <lrg@...mlogic.co.uk> Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 6) On Thursday 13 May 2010, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl> [100513 14:16]: > > On Thursday 13 May 2010, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > > On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 01:23:20PM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > > * Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com> [100513 13:03]: > > > > > On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 01:00:04PM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > The system stays running because there's something to do. The system > > > > > > won't suspend until all the processors hit the kernel idle loop and > > > > > > the next_timer_interrupt_critical() returns nothing. > > > > > > > > > > At which point an application in a busy loop cripples you. > > > > > > > > Maybe you could deal with the misbehaving untrusted apps in the userspace > > > > by sending kill -STOP to them when the screen blanks? Then continue > > > > when some event wakes up the system again. > > > > > > And if that's the application that's listening to the network socket > > > that you want to get a wakeup event from? This problem is hard. I'd love > > > there to be an elegant solution based on using the scheduler, but I > > > really don't know what it is. > > > > I agree and I don't understand the problem that people have with the > > opportunistic suspend feature. > > It seems to be picking quite a few comments for one. > > > It solves a practical issue that _at_ _the_ _moment_ cannot be solved > > differently, while there's a growing number of out-of-tree drivers depending > > on this framework. We need those drivers in and because we don't have any > > viable alternative at hand, we have no good reason to reject it. > > Nothing is preventing merging the drivers can be merged without > these calls. And yet, there _is_ a growing nuber of drivers that don't get merge because of that. That's _reality_. Are you going to discuss with facts, or what? 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists