linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] rtc-cmos: fix suspend/resume

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: <20101222141947.94322b9c.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Wed, 22 Dec 2010 14:19:47 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Daniel Drake <dsd@...top.org>
Cc:	a.zummo@...ertech.it, rtc-linux@...glegroups.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, pgf@...top.org, rjw@...k.pl,
	stable@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] rtc-cmos: fix suspend/resume

On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 19:08:28 +0000 (GMT)
Daniel Drake <dsd@...top.org> wrote:

> From: Paul Fox <pgf@...top.org>
> 
> rtc-cmos was setting suspend/resume hooks at the device_driver level.
> However, the platform bus code (drivers/base/platform.c) only looks
> for resume hooks at the dev_pm_ops level, or within the platform_driver.
> 
> Switch rtc_cmos to use dev_pm_ops so that suspend/resume code is
> executed again.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Paul Fox <pgf@...top.org>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Drake <dsd@...top.org>
> ---
>  drivers/rtc/rtc-cmos.c |   16 +++++++++-------
>  1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> v2: incorporate feedback from Rafael J. Wysocki, fix tabs, make a bit more
> consistent with typical SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS users.
> 
> v3: remove const keyword already set by macro, thanks to Rafael

It's unclear what the user-visible effects of this bug were.  Machine
fails to suspend?  RTC loses its brains on resume?  Something else?

That's really important information for a bugfix's changelog.  Please
never omit it.



I'm going to assume that whatever-the-behaviour-is is fairly serious,
and that we want this patch in 2.6.37.  So I tagged it for backporting
into 2.6.37.1, as we're getting pretty close to 2.6.37.

The patch also applies to 2.6.36.  Is it needed there?  And in earlier
kernels?

--
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/