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  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:	Thu, 23 Jul 2015 09:55:41 +0000
From:	Hayes Wang <hayeswang@...ltek.com>
To:	Oliver Neukum <oneukum@...e.com>
CC:	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	nic_swsd <nic_swsd@...ltek.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net 2/3] r8152: fix remote wakeup

> Hi,
> 
> this is most likely wrong. Usbcore does check for a device's ability to
> do remote wakeup and will block a runtime suspend if it detects that
> a remote wakeup would be required but the device cannot deliver.
> (static int autosuspend_check())
> 
> So by removing the flag in the probe() method means that devices will
> suspend during operations without remote wakeup requested. Thus an
> incoming packet cannot wake them up.
> 
> If you remove setting the flag on probe() you need to set it at open()
> [and reset on close()], as devices which cannot do remote wakeup must
> only be suspended when they are down.

Hi,

I don't think I understand your description clearly. My idea is that if the
device doesn't support wakeup, we don't need set " needs_remote_wakeup".
We allow the device could be suspended and couldn't be waked up by
incoming packet. The system could be waked up by other methods except
by the device.

I don't understand why I have to set it at open() and reset it at close(). And
why must the device only be suspended when it is down?

Best Regards,
Hayes

Powered by blists - more mailing lists