From: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Sebastian Capella <sebastian.capella@linaro.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: machine_power_off should not return
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 07:12:27 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140326101227.GC941@arch.cereza> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140326005115.GW7528@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Russell,
Thanks for the reply!
On Mar 26, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 07:45:55PM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
> >
> > Without this patch we got the heartbeat's reboot_notifier called twice while
> > testing the recent hibernation patches, which was unexpected and produced a
> > kernel panic: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/19/363
>
> I don't see why we should make this change. kernel/reboot.c handles
> this function returning, so other places should do too.
>
> Even on x86, this function can return:
>
[..]
>
> Therefore, I'd say... it's a bug in the hibernation code - or we probably
> have many buggy architectures. I'd suggest fixing the hibernation code
> rather than stuffing some workaround like an endless loop into every
> architecture.
>
Which is exactly what Sebastian did first:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/20/605
But Pavel asked to fix ARM's machine_power_off instead.
Also, looking at the other architectures, it seems this API is not well
defined: some of them have an infinite loop, some don't. So it's hard to
say the function is supposed to return or not.
--
Ezequiel García, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android Engineering
http://free-electrons.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-03-26 10:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-03-24 18:13 [PATCH] ARM: machine_power_off should not return Sebastian Capella
2014-03-25 22:45 ` Ezequiel Garcia
2014-03-26 0:51 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-03-26 10:12 ` Ezequiel Garcia [this message]
2014-03-26 10:59 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140326101227.GC941@arch.cereza \
--to=ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=sebastian.capella@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox