linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC] PM / Hibernate: no kernel_power_off when pm_power

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20140416215718.7f58efd8@alan.etchedpixels.co.uk>
Date:	Wed, 16 Apr 2014 21:57:18 +0100
From:	One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Sebastian Capella <sebastian.capella@...aro.org>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia@...e-electrons.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] PM / Hibernate: no kernel_power_off when
 pm_power_off NULL

> I'd say scrap (a) _unless_ we're going to add while (1) loops to all
> the architectures.  Alternatively, we could just accept that
> machine_power_off() may return and deal with that case (iow, not
> crash) in generic code.

What would the right behaviour be

while(1);

isn't really nice behaviour on a modern device 

 
--
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/