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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <d6507fae-d0a6-00f4-4259-4084b6a442d8@roeck-us.net>
Date:   Tue, 17 Sep 2019 06:06:00 -0700
From:   Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
Cc:     "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 9/17/19 12:01 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 10:28 PM Thierry Reding
> <thierry.reding@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>> All of the patches beyond the 6 in this set rely on the system reset and
>> power "framework". I don't think there was broad concensus on that idea
>> yet.
> 
> Ok, I see.
> 
>> If you think it's worth another try I'm happy to send the patches
>> out again.
> 
> Maybe do that after we pull the first set into arm-soc then. If
> we can reach consensus, I can merge them as a follow-up,
> either through the soc tree as a new subsystem or through
> the asm-generic tree as cross-architecture work.
> 

I'd suggest to keep the two patch sets separate, though, and apply
the 6 system reset patches either way.

Thanks,
Guenter