netdev - Re: Network drivers that don't suspend on interface down

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: <1166691253.3365.1480.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
Date:	Thu, 21 Dec 2006 09:54:13 +0100
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To:	Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...il.com>
Cc:	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Network drivers that don't suspend on interface down


> Is there some reason why we can't have the OS just do the D3
> transition for all drivers that register support?  I mean, this power
> management using D states is actually driver *independent* and at
> least way back in the day was supposed to be implemented for "OS power
> management"

all you need to do is 1 function call from your interface down code.. so
it's really not a big deal to just do that call ;)
(well and you want the D0 call in the up code, but that's ok)

-- 
if you want to mail me at work (you don't), use arjan (at) linux.intel.com
Test the interaction between Linux and your BIOS via http://www.linuxfirmwarekit.org

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html