linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/6] ARM, arm64: Remove arm_pm

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 16 Sep 2019 08:43:36 -0700
From:   Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:     Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] ARM, arm64: Remove arm_pm_restart()

On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 03:49:20PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 06:17:01AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On 9/16/19 12:49 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > On Sat, Sep 14, 2019 at 5:26 PM Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 12:05:06PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > > > > From: Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>
> > > > > 
> > > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > > 
> > > > > This small series is preparatory work for a series that I'm working on
> > > > > which attempts to establish a formal framework for system restart and
> > > > > power off.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Guenter has done a lot of good work in this area, but it never got
> > > > > merged. I think this set is a valuable addition to the kernel because
> > > > > it converts all odd providers to the established mechanism for restart.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Since this is stretched across both 32-bit and 64-bit ARM, as well as
> > > > > PSCI, and given the SoC/board level of functionality, I think it might
> > > > > make sense to take this through the ARM SoC tree in order to simplify
> > > > > the interdependencies. But it should also be possible to take patches
> > > > > 1-4 via their respective trees this cycle and patches 5-6 through the
> > > > > ARM and arm64 trees for the next cycle, if that's preferred.
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > We tried this twice now, and it seems to go nowhere. What does it take
> > > > to get it applied ?
> > > 
> > > Can you send a pull request to soc@...nel.org after the merge window,
> > > with everyone else on Cc? If nobody objects, I'll merge it through
> > > the soc tree.
> > > 
> > 
> > Sure, I'll rebase and do that.
> 
> I've uploaded a rebased tree here:
> 
> 	https://github.com/thierryreding/linux/tree/for-5.5/system-power-reset
> 
> The first 6 patches in that tree correspond to this series. There were a
> couple of conflicts I had to resolve and I haven't fully tested the
> series yet, but if you haven't done any of the rebasing, the above may
> be useful to you.
> 

Maybe Arnd can just use your branch (or rather part of it if you would
split it off) since you already did the work ?

Thanks,
Guenter