Messages in this thread | | | From | Feng Hong <> | Date | Tue, 18 Sep 2012 23:26:41 -0700 | Subject | RE: [PATCH] poweroff: fix bug in orderly_poweroff |
| |
Hi, Eric,
I agree with your idea, I'll prepare another patch, thanks for remind this possible issue.
-- Best Regards, Feng Hong Application Processor Software Engnieer Marvell Technology (Shanghai) Ltd
-----Original Message----- From: Eric W. Biederman [mailto:ebiederm@xmission.com] Sent: 2012年9月19日 13:58 To: Feng Hong Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org; gorcunov@openvz.org; keescook@chromium.org; serge.hallyn@canonical.com; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] poweroff: fix bug in orderly_poweroff
Feng Hong <hongfeng@marvell.com> writes:
> Hi, Eric > > 1. We are developing on an Android phone platform, we use thermal > framework to monitor the temperature, when the temperature above like > 110 degree, thermal framework will use orderly_shutdown to shutdown > phone, however, on Android platform there is no " /sbin/poweroff " cmd > ready . Then we want "fail ret" to trigger force shutdown (use > kernel_power_off), but always we get "suc ret"
> 2. Here the caller just wait for "poweroff" userspace application, if > it block the called, then it's the "poweroff" problem itself
> 3. As in the original orderly_shutdown design, we must get the right > "ret", if this ret is always "0", then it obey orderly_poweroff design > goal. Step 2: force shutdown is always useless code.
That sounds like a clear case that we need to change it to UMH_WAIT_EXEC.
Changing it to UMH_WAIT_PROC seems much more dangerous.
Eric
| |