linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: rtc-linux@googlegroups.com,
	kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Alessandro Zummo <alessandro.zummo@towertech.it>
Subject: Re: RTC wakealarm write-only, still has 644 permissions
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 13:10:40 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200711301310.40360.david-b@pacbell.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071130203544.GB1677@elf.ucw.cz>

On Friday 30 November 2007, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > 
> > It's not an issue of accidental writes, it's an issue of there being
> > no other synchronization for setting those alarms.  Remember that both
> > RTC_WKALM_SET and RTC_ALM_SET ioctls can set that same alarm, and so
> > could a different userspace activity ...
> 
> We have 3 interfaces to one hardware resource. I do not think kernel
> should try to arbitrate it here. There's just one alarm clock with
> three interfaces.

Having three interfaces is bad enough ... ensuring that none of
them can ever be used safely would be stupid.


> > As written, this allows one userspace activity to clobber another if
> > it does so explicitly, by first disabling the other one and then
> > setting its own alarm.  But the idea is to minimize "accidents" like
> > unintentionally clobbering an alarm set by someone else.
> 
> Well, I could not get it to work with this "avoid-clobber" feature.

I had earlier pointed out a different issue, whereby "oneshot"
semantics weren't consistently followed.  I've been working on
some patches to address that.  The ACPI bits still need work,
but I'll forward one part soonish.


> > > If I remove "accidental alarm modify" logic, I can actually use rtc to
> > > wake up more than once per boot.
> > 
> > Evidently the alarm isn't being disabled then...

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That's the issue addressed by those patches.  (Specific to rtc-cmos,
not to RTCs on saner hardware.)


> I think we should just remove the 'avoid-clobber' logic. If userland
> wants to somehow arbitrate access, it can.

Pray tell, *HOW* could it arbitrate?


> Now, if we want to provide "nice" interface for timed sleep, I think
> we can. Actually, I'd like to use normal select() as such an
> interface,

Yeah, what ever happened to timerfd?  :)


> and enable kernel to automatically detect when it can sleep 
> and when it has to wake up.

There's the "rtcwake" thing.  That got merged into util-linux-ng, but
I happened to notice its setup_alarm() is calling gmtime() instead
of localtime() ... my suspicion is that the uClibc version I was using
had some timezone bugs, or else there's some other bug lurking in the
vicinity of dual-bootiness.

Note that "wakealarm" is not intende to be a "timed sleep" interface
at all ... it's just to set the wakealarm.  Something else is in charge
of putting the system to sleep, such as "echo mem > /sys/power/state"
or some GUI thing hooked up to logic that knows about how to make frame
buffers recover.

- Dave

  reply	other threads:[~2007-11-30 21:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-09-20 10:32 RTC wakealarm write-only, still has 644 permissions Pavel Machek
2007-09-20 10:50 ` Pavel Machek
2007-09-22  5:38   ` David Brownell
2007-10-02  9:36     ` Pavel Machek
2007-10-03  2:15       ` David Brownell
2007-11-28 23:26     ` Pavel Machek
2007-11-29  8:02       ` Tino Keitel
2007-11-29 18:10       ` David Brownell
2007-11-29 18:14         ` Alessandro Zummo
2007-11-30 20:35         ` Pavel Machek
2007-11-30 21:10           ` David Brownell [this message]
2007-11-30 21:20             ` Mark Lord
2007-11-30 21:27               ` Pavel Machek
2007-12-02 11:36             ` Pavel Machek
2007-12-02 16:03               ` David Brownell
     [not found]     ` <20071128230451.GA1547@elf.ucw.cz>
2007-11-28 23:26       ` Pavel Machek

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=200711301310.40360.david-b@pacbell.net \
    --to=david-b@pacbell.net \
    --cc=alessandro.zummo@towertech.it \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
    --cc=rtc-linux@googlegroups.com \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).