linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] thunderbolt: Add wake on connect/disconnect on USB4 ports

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, 28 Sep 2022 08:03:42 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Rajat Khandelwal <rajat.khandelwal@...el.com>,
        andreas.noever@...il.com, michael.jamet@...el.com,
        YehezkelShB@...il.com, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] thunderbolt: Add wake on connect/disconnect on USB4 ports

On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 08:01:03AM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 06:48:41PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 06:30:05PM +0530, Rajat Khandelwal wrote:
> > > Wake on connect/disconnect is only supported while runtime suspend
> > > for now, which is obviously necessary. Its also not inherently
> > > desired for the system to wakeup on thunderbolt hot events.
> > > However, we can still make user in control of waking up the system
> > > in the events of hot plug/unplug.
> > > This patch adds 'wakeup' attribute under 'usb4_portX/power' sysfs
> > > attribute and only enables wakes on connect/disconnect to the
> > > respective port when 'wakeup' is set to 'enabled'. The attribute
> > > is set to 'disabled' by default.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Rajat Khandelwal <rajat.khandelwal@...el.com>
> > 
> > Including the issue pointed out below by my bot, Intel has a "special"
> > requirement that you are not meeting here in order to send out patches
> > for review on a public mailing list in a subsystem like this (i.e. one
> > that I and others review patches on.)
> > 
> > Please meet that requirement first before sending any future kernel
> > patches out.
> 
> I asked Khandelwal to send this patch upstream after we did an internal
> review for it (I think I also asked him to send this out after v6.1-rc1
> is released but whatever).

So the correct rules were not followed, please fix that :(

> I think the bot noticed the v4 he sent earlier that was the same we
> reviewed internally.

Again, yes, this was sent incorrectly.

> I was planning to pick this up after the merge window closes if there
> are no objections.

I'm objecting :)

thanks,

greg k-h