linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5]: Improve performance of LZO hibernation

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: <1317196456.1998.24.camel@shrek.rexursive.com>
Date:	Wed, 28 Sep 2011 17:54:16 +1000
From:	Bojan Smojver <bojan@...ursive.com>
To:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5]: Improve performance of LZO hibernation

On Wed, 2011-09-28 at 10:48 +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> > The compression/decompression threads stop by breaking out of the
> loop.
> > At least they should, right? Did I misread some docs here?
> 
> Yes, the threads are stopped. What happens after that? Will the
> hibernation process be aborted? How can this be tested? 

I'm guessing here that you mean that parts of the kernel other than
hibernation code itself can do this (i.e. set the flag for the thread to
stop, so kthread_should_stop() returns true). Correct?

If that is a possibility (which I didn't take into account at all), I
will need to rewrite so that if such a thing happens, we abort the
hibernation process. It should not be difficult.

Right now, this would result in - well I don't know what exactly - most
likely corrupted data on disk or on memory.

-- 
Bojan

--
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/