linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 0/3] Asynchronous shutdown interface and example implementation

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:   Wed, 30 Mar 2022 13:13:30 +0200
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:     Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>
Cc:     Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>,
        Tanjore Suresh <tansuresh@...gle.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-nvme <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/3] Asynchronous shutdown interface and example implementation

On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 8:25 AM Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 08:07:51PM -0600, Keith Busch wrote:
> > Thanks, I agree we should improve shutdown times. I tried a while ago, but
> > lost track to follow up at the time. Here's the reference, fwiw, though it
> > may be out of date :):
> >
> >   http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-nvme/2014-May/000826.html
> >
> > The above solution is similiar to how probe waits on an async domain.
> > Maybe pci can schedule the async shutdown instead of relying on low-level
> > drivers so that everyone implicitly benefits instead of just nvme? I'll
> > double-check if that's reasonable, but I'll look through this series too.
>
> Using the async API seems much more reasonable than adding new callbacks.
>
> However I'd argue that it shouldn't be necessary to amend any drivers,
> this should all be doable in the driver core:  Basically a device needs
> to wait for its children and device links consumers to shutdown, apart
> from that everything should be able to run asynchronously.

Well, this is done already in the system-wide and hibernation paths.
It should be possible to implement asynchronous shutdown analogously.