linux-kernel - Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8)

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: <AANLkTim7LMG0kcYwmcL9AcdR5-GgcCyb2ZagJhGyt2_e@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 29 May 2010 08:11:58 -0700
From:	Brian Swetland <swetland@...gle.com>
To:	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc:	Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Linux PM <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH 0/8] Suspend block api (version 8)

On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 8:03 AM, Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu> wrote:
> On Sat, 29 May 2010, Brian Swetland wrote:
>> On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 7:10 AM, Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu> wrote:
>> > If no such constraints are active, the QoS-based suspend blocks in an
>> > interruptible wait until the number of active QOS_EVENTUALLY
>> > constraints drops to 0.  When that happens, it carries out a normal
>> > suspend-to-RAM -- except that it checks along the way to make sure that
>> > no new QoS constraints are activated while the suspend is in progress.
>> > If they are, the PM core backs out and fails the QoS-based suspend.
>>
>> The issue with this approach is that if userspace wants to suspend
>> while a driver is holding a QOS_EVENTUALLY constraint, it's basically
>> going to spin constantly writing "qos" and failing.
>
> No, no.  If userspace wants to suspend while a driver is holding a
> QOS_EVENTUALLY constraint, the user process blocks in an interruptible
> wait state as described in the first paragraph above.

Oops -- I misread the first paragraph.  The behavior you described is
indeed what I would want.

Brian
--
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/