On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 17:44:47 +0100
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I need to look at all uses of PF_NOFREEZE -- as I understand the
> > code, processes marked PF_NOFREEZE will continue running, potentially
> > interfering with the hotplug operation. :-(
> >
> > I will pass my findings on to this list.
>
> Well, I did it some time ago, although not very thoroughly.
>
> AFAICS there are not so many, but one that stands out is the worker threads.
> We needed two of them to actually go to sleep, so now it's possible to create
> a "freezeable workqueue" the worker thread of which will not set PF_NOFREEZE,
> but currently this is only used by XFS.
Or we can create a variant of freeze_processes which ignores PF_NOFREEZE.
As I said eariler, we might need to change the freezer code for this
application. In fact we should do so: that sys_sync() call in there is
quite inappropriate, as is, I suppose, the two-pass freeze attempt. As are
the nice printks, come to that.
Pretty simple stuff though.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
