netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 01/11] xen/manage: keep track of the on-going suspend mode

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200805174219.GA16105@dev-dsk-anchalag-2a-9c2d1d96.us-west-2.amazon.com>
Date:   Wed, 5 Aug 2020 17:42:19 +0000
From:   Anchal Agarwal <anchalag@...zon.com>
To:     Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>
CC:     Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>, <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        <mingo@...hat.com>, <bp@...en8.de>, <hpa@...or.com>,
        <x86@...nel.org>, <jgross@...e.com>, <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-mm@...ck.org>, <kamatam@...zon.com>,
        <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>, <roger.pau@...rix.com>,
        <axboe@...nel.dk>, <davem@...emloft.net>, <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        <len.brown@...el.com>, <pavel@....cz>, <peterz@...radead.org>,
        <eduval@...zon.com>, <sblbir@...zon.com>,
        <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>, <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>, <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/11] xen/manage: keep track of the on-going suspend mode

On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 09:31:13AM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the content is safe.
> 
> 
> 
> On 8/4/20 7:42 PM, Anchal Agarwal wrote:
> >
> > I think this could be done. PM_HIBERNATION_PREPARE could return -ENOTSUPP
> > for arm and pvh dom0 when the notifier call chain is invoked for this case
> > in hibernate(). This will then be an empty notifier just for checking two
> > usecases.
> > Also, for pvh dom0, the earlier code didn't register any notifier,
> > with this approach you are suggesting setup the notifier for hvm/pvh dom0 and
> > arm but fail during notifier call chain during PM_HIBERNATION_PREPARE ?
> 
> 
> Right.
> 
> 
> (Although the earlier code did register the notifier:
> xen_setup_pm_notifier() would return an error for !xen_hvm_domain() and
> PVH *is* an HVM domain, so registration would actually happen)
>
Yes you are right. My bad, what I meant with "earlier code" was whatever we
discussed w.r.t to removing the notifier all together, it won't be registered for
pvh dom0.
Anyways got the point :)
> 
> >
> > I think still getting rid of suspend mode that was earlier a part of this
> > notifier is a good idea as it seems redundant as you pointed out earlier.
> 
> 
> Yes.
> 
> 
> -boris
Thanks,
Anchal
> 
>