linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH]: In kernel hibernation, suspend to both

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]

Date:	Tue, 15 May 2012 09:59:56 +1000
From:	Bojan Smojver <bojan@...ursive.com>
To:	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc:	"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	bp@...en8.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH]: In kernel hibernation, suspend to both

On Mon, 2012-05-14 at 21:47 +1000, Bojan Smojver wrote:
> No. That hangs my box.
> 
> This triggers a bug in workqueues code (essentially the same as the
> previous patch, except for sys_sync() not being done):

Alan/Srivatsa,

Coming back to the explanation of how this whole thing works, it would
seem that at the point of image writing all devices are fully functional
(not just some, as I mistakenly believed). However, the processes are
supposed to be already frozen, right? Calling suspend_prepare(), which
will essentially try to freeze the processes and kernel threads, seems
like the wrong thing to do.

Did you guys mean that we should be calling
pm_notifier_call_chain(PM_SUSPEND_PREPARE) only here?

-- 
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/