| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <201009272249.59966.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 22:49:59 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To: Nigel Cunningham <nigel@...onice.net>
Cc: Linux PM <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"TuxOnIce-devel" <tuxonice-devel@...onice.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/23] Record & display i/o speed post resume.
On Monday, September 27, 2010, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On 28/09/10 06:06, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday, September 27, 2010, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> >> Record the speed at which the image is written and read, and
> >> display it to the user post-resume.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Nigel Cunningham<nigel@...onice.net>
> >> ---
> >> kernel/power/hibernate.c | 11 ++++++++++-
> >> kernel/power/power.h | 3 ++-
> >> kernel/power/swap.c | 14 +++++++++++---
> >> 3 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/kernel/power/hibernate.c b/kernel/power/hibernate.c
> >> index 6c9c9dc..0cd1f05 100644
> >> --- a/kernel/power/hibernate.c
> >> +++ b/kernel/power/hibernate.c
> >> @@ -212,7 +212,7 @@ static void platform_recover(int platform_mode)
> >> * @msg - introductory message to print
> >> */
> >>
> >> -void swsusp_show_speed(struct timeval *start, struct timeval *stop,
> >> +int swsusp_show_speed(struct timeval *start, struct timeval *stop,
> >> unsigned nr_pages, char *msg)
> >> {
> >> s64 elapsed_centisecs64;
> >> @@ -231,6 +231,7 @@ void swsusp_show_speed(struct timeval *start, struct timeval *stop,
> >> msg, k,
> >> centisecs / 100, centisecs % 100,
> >> kps / 1000, (kps % 1000) / 10);
> >> + return kps / 1000;
> >> }
> >>
> >> /**
> >> @@ -648,6 +649,14 @@ int hibernate(void)
> >> power_down();
> >> } else {
> >> pr_debug("PM: Image restored successfully.\n");
> >> + if (write_speed)
> >> + pr_debug("PM: Image written at %u MB/s.\n",
> >> + (u8) write_speed);
> >> + write_speed = 0;
> >> + if (read_speed)
> >> + pr_debug("PM: Image read at %u MB/s.\n",
> >> + (u8) read_speed);
> >> + read_speed = 0;
> >> }
> >>
> >> Thaw:
> >> diff --git a/kernel/power/power.h b/kernel/power/power.h
> >> index 03634be..22f8607 100644
> >> --- a/kernel/power/power.h
> >> +++ b/kernel/power/power.h
> >> @@ -53,6 +53,7 @@ extern int hibernation_snapshot(int platform_mode);
> >> extern int hibernation_restore(int platform_mode);
> >> extern int hibernation_platform_enter(void);
> >>
> >> +extern char __nosavedata write_speed, read_speed;
> >> #else /* !CONFIG_HIBERNATION */
> >>
> >> static inline void hibernate_image_size_init(void) {}
> >> @@ -161,7 +162,7 @@ extern int hib_wait_on_bio_chain(struct bio **bio_chain);
> >>
> >> struct timeval;
> >> /* kernel/power/swsusp.c */
> >> -extern void swsusp_show_speed(struct timeval *, struct timeval *,
> >> +extern int swsusp_show_speed(struct timeval *, struct timeval *,
> >> unsigned int, char *);
> >>
> >> #ifdef CONFIG_SUSPEND
> >> diff --git a/kernel/power/swap.c b/kernel/power/swap.c
> >> index 3c01105..caf4db8 100644
> >> --- a/kernel/power/swap.c
> >> +++ b/kernel/power/swap.c
> >> @@ -45,7 +45,8 @@ struct swap_map_page {
> >> };
> >>
> >> struct swsusp_header {
> >> - char reserved[PAGE_SIZE - 20 - sizeof(sector_t) - sizeof(int)];
> >> + char reserved[PAGE_SIZE - 21 - sizeof(sector_t) - sizeof(int)];
> >> + char write_speed;
> >> sector_t image;
> >> unsigned int flags; /* Flags to pass to the "boot" kernel */
> >> char orig_sig[10];
> >> @@ -161,6 +162,7 @@ int swsusp_swap_in_use(void)
> >>
> >> static unsigned short root_swap = 0xffff;
> >> struct block_device *hib_resume_bdev;
> >> +char __nosavedata write_speed, read_speed;
> >
> > I really should have noticed that earlier, but I don't really like __nosavedata
> > being used here. In fact, it shouldn't be used at all any more, because it's
> > meaningless on x86_64.
>
> Really? Okay. When did that change?
Well, some time ago, looks like in 2007, but the files changed and were moving
around, so it's hard to say exactly.
> > I'm not sure how to implement that without __nosavedata, but please don't
> > use it. Sorry aboiut that.
>
> Well then, for now, let's drop that patch then. At least it's got us the
> numbers we needed to see these patches are useful. Longer term, I'll do
> what I do in TuxOnIce and allocate a page while writing the image, store
> it's location in the image header and use it the transfer information
> from the boot kernel to the resumed kernel. (Essentially the same thing,
> except without the special section).
The problem is that on x86_64 the boot kernel may be completely different
from the image kernel (different version, different configuration), so there is
no guarantee that your page frame allocated while writing the image would be
available to the boot kernel (it may contain the kernel code, for example).
You'd really need to replace one of the image pages with something prepared
while the image was being read. For that, you'd need to allocate a page before
creating the image and pass its PFN in the image header.
Thanks,
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