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]

Date:	Tue, 28 Oct 2014 21:58:53 +0100
From:	Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de>
To:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
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>,
	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	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

Am Dienstag, 28. Oktober 2014, 10:11:06 schrieb Guenter Roeck:
> 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>
> Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
> Cc: Philippe Rétornaz <philippe.retornaz@...il.com>
> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>
> Cc: Romain Perier <romain.perier@...il.com>
> Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
> ---

Similarly to the restart handlers, I really like the concept.

Acked-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>

--
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/