linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] thermal/core: Disable uevent messages for cooling devices

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: Mon, 8 Apr 2024 21:59:46 +0300
From: Roman Stratiienko <r.stratiienko@...il.com>
To: John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, rafael@...nel.org, daniel.lezcano@...aro.org, 
	amitk@...nel.org, rui.zhang@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	megi@....cz
Subject: Re: [RFC] thermal/core: Disable uevent messages for cooling devices

Hi John,

I haven't worked on it since I posted it initially. But it looks like
there's an alternative patch already upstreamed and backported into
stable:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kernel/CAJZ5v0hHTuEXmQA=0D90eR_KUsOsfcxYbTS=zQYDTXuY6o_K_Q@mail.gmail.com/T/

BR,
Roman

пн, 8 апр. 2024 г. в 21:48, John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>:
>
> On Sun, Jul 10, 2022 at 9:40 AM Roman Stratiienko
> <r.stratiienko@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > During suspend, the big CPU cluster is turned off first while a little
> > is still running. This forcibly unregisters the cooling device which
> > sends a "REMOVE" uevent to all subscribers [1].
> >
> > In case userspace netlink subscriber has set the EPOLLWAKEUP flag, a
> > wakeup event is triggered that causes suspend to be aborted.
> >
> > Without this change, suspend doesn't work on PinePhone PRO with AOSP
> > userland.
> >
> > [1]: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=5c238a8b599f1ae25eaeb08ad0e9e13e2b9eb023
> > Signed-off-by: Roman Stratiienko <r.stratiienko@...il.com>
>
> Hey Roman,
>   I wanted to drudge this patch up, to ask what the current status of
> it was?  Is there an alternative solution that you've been using since
> this was last sent out?
> I've heard of some vendors working around something similar, so I
> wanted to see if we could get a common fix upstream.
>
> thanks
> -john