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  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]
Date:	Sun, 12 Oct 2014 22:16:37 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <>
To:	Guenter Roeck <>
	Len Brown <>, Pavel Machek <>,
	Andrew Morton <>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] acpi: Use syscore instead of pm_power_off_prepare to prepare for poweroff

On Sunday, October 12, 2014 12:35:22 PM Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 10/12/2014 12:45 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Saturday, October 11, 2014 02:14:16 PM Guenter Roeck wrote:
> >> The syscore shutdown callback seems to be perfectly suited to prepare for system
> >> poweroff. Use it instead of pm_power_off_prepare.
> >
> > How much testing did that receive?
> >
> As I mentioned in patch 0/2, compile tested so far only. Before I start playing
> with my servers, I wanted to get some feedback if the idea is worth pursuing
> further or if I am missing something essential.

Well, it makes sense in principle, but the ordering with respect to the other
syscore shutdown things and the migrate_to_reboot_cpu() may be a problem.

I always get nervous when the ordering of ACPI-related code changes like
that and the reason is quite weak this time to be honest.

I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists