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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <1458660552.1990.13.camel@suse.com> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 16:29:12 +0100 From: Oliver Neukum <oneukum@...e.com> To: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu> Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>, Microchip Linux Driver Support <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>, Woojung Huh <woojung.huh@...rochip.com>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] lan78xx: Protect runtime_auto check by #ifdef CONFIG_PM On Tue, 2016-03-22 at 11:13 -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > > Indeed. In that case the point is moot. But it is correct to ask > > the core whether the device is autosuspended at that point rather > > than keep a private flag if you can. > > That's why we have pm_runtime_status_suspended(). I guess we are in violent agreement though we were unaware of being in that state. Regards Oliver
Powered by blists - more mailing lists