linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ACPI / sleep: EC-based wakeup from suspend-to-idle on recent systems

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: <32586599.ds5xRoJDge@aspire.rjw.lan>
Date:   Fri, 23 Jun 2017 14:27:50 +0200
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To:     "Zheng, Lv" <lv.zheng@...el.com>
Cc:     Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
        Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@...l.com>,
        Tom Lanyon <tom@...shoeco.com>,
        Jér?me de Bretagne 
        <jerome.debretagne@...il.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI / sleep: EC-based wakeup from suspend-to-idle on recent systems

On Friday, June 23, 2017 02:13:57 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, June 23, 2017 06:30:35 AM Zheng, Lv wrote:
> > Hi, Rafael
> > 
> 
> [cut]
> 
> > > 
> > > Index: linux-pm/drivers/acpi/ec.c
> > > ===================================================================
> > > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/ec.c
> > > +++ linux-pm/drivers/acpi/ec.c
> > > @@ -1835,7 +1835,7 @@ static int acpi_ec_suspend(struct device
> > >  	struct acpi_ec *ec =
> > >  		acpi_driver_data(to_acpi_device(dev));
> > > 
> > > -	if (ec_freeze_events)
> > > +	if (acpi_sleep_no_ec_events() && ec_freeze_events)
> > >  		acpi_ec_disable_event(ec);
> > >  	return 0;
> > >  }
> > 
> > I just notice a slight pontential issue.
> > Should we add a similar change to acpi_ec_stop()?
> 
> Yes, it looks like that, thanks!

Actually, no, I don't think so, because acpi_ec_block_transactions() is not
used for suspend-to-idle, but I need a separate variable for that, because
pm_suspend_via_firmware() also returns "false" for hibernation.

Thanks,
Rafael