linux-kernel - Re: Attempted summary of suspend-blockers LKML thread, take three

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: <AANLkTinbsXEk7YL31Q2GHHjeVRHGgpm0mpLzDBY1Ob4z@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:09:03 +0300
From:	Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@...il.com>
To:	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>
Cc:	Brian Swetland <swetland@...gle.com>, "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	david@...g.hm, linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, arve@...roid.com,
	mjg59@...f.ucam.org, pavel@....cz, florian@...kler.org,
	rjw@...k.pl, peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
	menage@...gle.com, david-b@...bell.net, James.Bottomley@...e.de,
	arjan@...radead.org, swmike@....pp.se, galibert@...ox.com,
	dipankar@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: Attempted summary of suspend-blockers LKML thread, take three

On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 10:57 PM, Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:19:34 -0700
> Brian Swetland <swetland@...gle.com> wrote:
>> Question though -- has every feature ever added to the kernel been a
>> feature that there's pre-existing usage of?  Seems like a chicken and
>> egg problem.  Also, some people seem to think there's value in being
>> able to build kernels "out of the box" that work with the Android
>> userspace -- given that there are a few devices out there that have
>> that userspace on 'em.
>
> We generally try to merge new features like this along with code that
> uses said feature, but there are always exceptions.  We've merged code
> one release or more before the new code gets used for example, which is
> fine IMO.  What we don't want to see is some new drop of code added and
> abandoned, but you already knew that.

If Android guys provided a bare minimal Debian system with suspend
blockers that people can take a look at and try, I think that would be
a good proof of concept. And a bare minimum to get the patches merged.

> At any rate, if Felipe is the only one arguing against including
> suspend blockers in the kernel, you're probably in good shape.  Based
> on my (rather cursory I admit) evaluation of this thread, it seems like
> reasonable people agree that there's a place for a suspend blocker like
> API in the kernel, and that dynamic power management is also highly
> desirable.  So where's the git pull request already? :)

I certainly have been the more vocal recently, but if that's confusing
you, I can shut up and let others do the argumentation. I remember at
least Alan Cox, Alan Stern, Thomas Gleixner, Kevin Hilman, Felipe
Balbi, Tony Lindgren, and Igor Stopa against them.

-- 
Felipe Contreras
--
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/