linux-kernel - Re: suspend blockers & Android integration

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: <AANLkTikdM79nmARagK9gLveMWEiT6rlk44UELes1k8Ch@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 5 Jun 2010 18:16:49 -0700
From:	Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, tytso@....edu,
	Brian Swetland <swetland@...gle.com>,
	Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>,
	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
	Felipe Balbi <felipe.balbi@...ia.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org>,
	Linux OMAP Mailing List <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux PM <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...prootsystems.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: suspend blockers & Android integration

2010/6/5 Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>:
> On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
>> 2010/6/5 Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>:
>> > On Sat, 5 Jun 2010, Arve Hjønnevåg wrote:
>> >> >> > That download might take a minute or two, but that's not an
>> >> >> > justification for the crapplication to run unconfined and prevent
>> >> >> > lower power states.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I agree, but this is not a simple problem to solve.
>> >> >
>> >> > Not with suspend blockers, but with cgroup confinement of crap, it's
>> >> > straight forward.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> I don't think is is straight forward. If the a process in the frozen
>> >> group holds a resource that a process in the unfrozen group needs, how
>> >> do deal with that?
>> >
>> > I'm going to fix the framework which puts the group into freeze state
>> > w/o making sure that there is no held shared resource. Come on it's
>> > not rocket science.
>> >
>>
>> I'm not sure which framework you are talking about here, but I don't
>> think there is a single framework that knows about all shared
>> resources.
>
> Damn, it's not me talking about "our framework", you are mentioning
> when it fits your needs.

You said you were going to fix the framework. I did know if you were
talking about the cgroup framework, or the android user-space
frameworks. I don't think either has knowledge about all shared
resources.

>
> If you do not have a clearly defined user space framework, then we
> talk about a completely random conglomeration of applications which
> need to be brought into submission by some global brute force
> approach.
>
> I'm tired of this, really. You just use terminlology as it fits to
> defend the complete design failure of android. But you fail to trick
> me :)
>
> Can you please explain in a consistent way how the application stack
> and the underlying framework (which exists according to android docs)
> is handling events and how the separation of trust level works ?
>

I don't think I can, since I only know small parts of it. I know some
events like input event go though a single thread in our system
process, while other events like network packets (which are also
wakeup events) goes directly to the app.

> We need to know that, otherwise we turn in circles forever.
>
> Thanks,
>
>        tglx



-- 
Arve Hjønnevåg
--
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/