linux-kernel - Re: [RFT][PATCH 0/2] ACPI / PM: Avoid spurious wakeups from non-wakeup GPEs in suspend-to-idle

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:   Mon, 17 Dec 2018 18:50:25 +0200
From:   Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc:     Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFT][PATCH 0/2] ACPI / PM: Avoid spurious wakeups from
 non-wakeup GPEs in suspend-to-idle

On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 12:19:27PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Hi All,

Hi Rafael,

> It turns out that on some systems non-wakeup GPEs cause trouble (see the
> changelog of patch [1/2]), so they better should be disabled during
> suspend-to-idle (at least before entering the main loop of it).  This
> is done in patch [1/2].
> 
> Patch [2/2] is just a folllow-up.

I tested both patches on Lenovo Carbon X1 6th generation and one new
Dell system. Both default to s2idle. I did not see any issues around
s2idle with the two patches applied.

Tested-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>