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: Wed, 26 May 2010 18:28:28 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de> Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>, Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>, Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>, Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>, Linux-pm mailing list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>, Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>, Nigel Cunningham <nigel@...onice.net>, Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>, Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>, Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@...il.com>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>, Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>, tytso@....edu Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] PM: Opportunistic suspend support. On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 11:18 -0500, James Bottomley wrote: > > Or make the suspend manager a C proglet and provide a JNI interface, > > or whatever. > > It's a fairly large piece of code to try to rewrite in C, so I don't > think that's feasible on a reasonable timescale. Android does have the > concept of special sockets that can be used to communicate from less to > more privileged processes (it has a very segmented runtime model), so > these might be usable ... they have a drawback that they're essentially > named pipes, so no multiplexing, but one per suspend influencing C > process shouldn't be a huge burden. It wouldn't need to convert the whole Frameworks layer into C, just enough to manage the suspend state. Anyway, I think there's been enough arguments against even the concept of opportunistic/auto-suspend, and I for one will object with a NAK if Rafael send this to Linus. The whole idea of segregating userspace like that, and not letting runnable thing run is very ill considered indeed. -- 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