| 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: <20130129020532.GA22941@rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de> Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 03:05:32 +0100 From: Andreas Mohr <andi@...as.de> To: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, rjw@...k.pl, lenb@...nel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] PM: Introduce suspend state PM_SUSPEND_FREEZE Hi, first, thanks a lot for advancing PM infrastructure! > #define PM_SUSPEND_ON ((__force suspend_state_t) 0) > -#define PM_SUSPEND_STANDBY ((__force suspend_state_t) 1) > +#define PM_SUSPEND_FREEZE ((__force suspend_state_t) 1) > +#define PM_SUSPEND_STANDBY ((__force suspend_state_t) 2) > #define PM_SUSPEND_MEM ((__force suspend_state_t) 3) > +#define PM_SUSPEND_MIN PM_SUSPEND_FREEZE > #define PM_SUSPEND_MAX ((__force suspend_state_t) 4) I'll just pretend to be hopeful that you managed to hunt down all relevant code sites (possibly even splattered around drivers?) which may have made illegally hard-coded assumptions about the number of PM_SUSPEND state "enum"s ;) (e.g. comparisons - such as "==", "<=" etc. - come into mind) Review of your patch was all fine, nothing to object about. Thanks, Andreas Mohr -- 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