linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] kernel: Add support for power-off handler call chain

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]

Message-ID: <20141028200424.GA20617@roeck-us.net>
Date:	Tue, 28 Oct 2014 13:04:24 -0700
From:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	Alan Cox <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>,
	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
	Philippe Rétornaz 
	<philippe.retornaz@...il.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Romain Perier <romain.perier@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] kernel: Add support for power-off handler call chain

On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 07:23:12PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Tue 2014-10-28 10:11:06, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > Various drivers implement architecture and/or device specific means to
> > power off the system.  For the most part, those drivers set the global
> > variable pm_power_off to point to a function within the driver.
> > 
> > This mechanism has a number of drawbacks.  Typically only one scheme
> > to remove power is supported (at least if pm_power_off is used).
> > At least in theory there can be multiple means remove power, some of
> > which may be less desirable. For example, some mechanisms may only
> > power off the CPU or the CPU card, while another may power off the
> > entire system.  Others may really just execute a restart sequence
> > or drop into the ROM monitor. Using pm_power_off can also be racy
> > if the function pointer is set from a driver built as module, as the
> > driver may be in the process of being unloaded when pm_power_off is
> > called. If there are multiple power-off handlers in the system, removing
> > a module with such a handler may inadvertently reset the pointer to
> > pm_power_off to NULL, leaving the system with no means to remove power.
> > 
> > Introduce a system power-off handler call chain to solve the described
> > problems.  This call chain is expected to be executed from the architecture
> > specific machine_power_off() function.  Drivers and architeceture code
> > providing system power-off functionality are expected to register with
> > this call chain.  When registering a power-off handler, callers can
> > provide a priority to control power-off handler execution sequence
> > and thus ensure that the power-off handler with the optimal capabilities
> > to remove power for a given system is called first.
> > 
> > Cc: Alan Cox <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
> > Cc: Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>
> > Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
> > Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
> > cc: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>
> > Cc: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
> > Cc: Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>
> 
> Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
> 
Thanks!

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/