linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 08/44] kernel: Move 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <5433EDCB.8060006@roeck-us.net>
Date:	Tue, 07 Oct 2014 06:42:35 -0700
From:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:	David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>
CC:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Xen-devel@...ts.xen.org" <Xen-devel@...ts.xen.org>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 08/44] kernel: Move pm_power_off to common
 code

On 10/07/2014 02:23 AM, David Vrabel wrote:
> On 07/10/14 06:28, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> pm_power_off is defined for all architectures. Move it to common code.
>>
>> Have all architectures call do_kernel_poweroff instead of pm_power_off.
>> Some architectures point pm_power_off to machine_power_off. For those,
>> call do_kernel_poweroff from machine_power_off instead.
> [...]
>>   arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c           |  3 +--
>
> The xen bits:
>
> Acked-by: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>
>
> Although for a mechanical change like this I wonder if acks from all
> subsystem maintainers is really necessary.
>

Probably not, but helpful. On the other side, as others may have
noticed, sending an e-mail with that many Cc: gets it classified
as spam by many mailers. I'll have to find a way to cut that down
for the next round without offending anyone.

Guenter

--
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/