linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] platform/x86/intel/hid: Don't wake on 5-button releases

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]

Message-ID: <29abd2f6-2de5-4a69-9113-61042c52f6bc@leemhuis.info>
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2024 07:54:32 +0100
From: "Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)"
 <regressions@...mhuis.info>
To: David McFarland <corngood@...il.com>
Cc: Chris Feng <chris.feng@...iatek.com>,
 Linux regressions mailing list <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>,
 "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
 Alex Hung <alexhung@...il.com>, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
 Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>,
 "platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org" <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
 LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] platform/x86/intel/hid: Don't wake on 5-button
 releases

On 29.03.24 19:06, David McFarland wrote:
> "Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)"
> <regressions@...mhuis.info> writes:
> 
>> David, from here is looks like this is stalled for ten days now. Or was
>> there some progress and I just missed it?
> No, I've not seen any emails since your last.

Thx for confirming.

>> From the cover letter[1] is sounds a lot like a "Fixes: 0c4cae1bc00d31
>> ("PM: hibernate: Avoid missing wakeup events during hibernation")" would
>> be appropriate here.
> 
> The specific behaviour I encountered (failure to hibernate) started with
> that commit, but I think it just exposed the underlying behaviour (wake
> on button release), which probably dates to when the driver was
> introduced.

Well, it depends on the maintainer in question (so you might better want
to ignore this advice!), but I'd say: mention that in the patch
description and add Fixes: tag, to ensure people pick it up when the
change that exposed the problem is backported.

This is hinted at in submitting-patches: "This tag also assists the
stable kernel team in determining which stable kernel versions should
receive your fix.". Maybe that text should mention scenario.

Ciao, Thorsten