linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] PM / Sleep: Extended control of suspend/hibernate interfaces

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: <12555.1319528840@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Date:	Tue, 25 Oct 2011 03:47:20 -0400
From:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To:	NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	mark gross <markgross@...gnar.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] PM / Sleep: Extended control of suspend/hibernate interfaces

On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 13:52:44 +1100, NeilBrown said:
> On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 12:23:43 +0200 "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl> wrote:
>
> > On Monday, October 24, 2011, NeilBrown wrote:
> > > On Sun, 23 Oct 2011 15:16:36 +0200 "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl> wrote:
> > > Similarly every system need one process to manage suspend.  It can be my
> > > daemon or your daemon or Alan's daemon but it cannot be 2 or more of them
> > > running at the same time as that doesn't make any more sense than having
> > > systemd and init running at the same time.
> >
> > I agree that it doesn't makes sense.  I don't agree that it implies people
> > won't try to do that.
>
> Does that matter?  If they complain, tell them it isn't a supported
> configuration.

We however *should* design things in such a way that if a second one is started
up, it tosses a nice obvious -EIDIOT error of some sort.

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped