linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 1/3] system-power: Add system power and restart framework

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: <20170130215301.GA18997@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
Date:   Mon, 30 Jan 2017 22:53:01 +0100
From:   Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:     Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] system-power: Add system power and restart framework

Hi!


> +struct system_power_chip;
> +
> +struct system_power_ops {
> +	int (*restart)(struct system_power_chip *chip, enum reboot_mode mode,
> +		       char *cmd);
> +	int (*power_off_prepare)(struct system_power_chip *chip);
> +	int (*power_off)(struct system_power_chip *chip);
> +};
> +
> +struct system_power_chip {
> +	const struct system_power_ops *ops;
> +	struct list_head list;
> +	struct device *dev;
> +};

Is it useful to have two structures? AFAICT one would do.

Do we always have struct device * to work with? IMO we have nothing
suitable for example in the ACPI case. Would void * be more suitable?

Could you convert someting (acpi?) to the new framework as
demonstration?
								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html