On Thursday, 5 July 2007 02:43, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> Miklos Szeredi writes:
>
> > OK, let me summarize the situation as I see it now: there are two
> > camps, the pro-freezers and the anti-freezers.
> >
> > Pro-freezers say:
> >
> > - don't remove the freezer, otherwise we'll have to deal with
> > numerous problems in drivers
> >
> > Anti-freezers say:
> >
> > - let's remove the freezer, which causes numerous problems
> >
> > Alan summerized the pro-freezer arguments well I think. What are the
> > anti-freezer arguments then?
>
> 1. The freezer cannot be guaranteed deadlock-free without constructing
> a dependency graph between tasks (both user and kernel), which is
> virtually impossible since the dependencies are not externally
> observable.
I don't agree with that.
The freezer only fails to handle uninterruptible tasks, so we need to take
the situations in which an uninterruptible task waits for a frozen task into
consideration. Now, if both tasks are from the user land, this is highly
unusual.
> 2. As a consequence of (1), we try to make a crude approximation of
> the graph by saying "only kernel threads that want to be frozen
> will be frozen" or some other similar statement.
No. The rule is that kernel threads should not be freezable, but there are
some for which that is useful.
> 3. However, (2) means that we can no longer guarantee that drivers
> will not get any I/O requests after their suspend method has been
> called, and therefore the freezer fails in its main objective.
This is a very general statement. Can you please give some examples?
> 4. We have an existence proof that reliable suspend can be achieved
> without the freezer.
No. We only know that it might work if the nonboot CPUs are disabled before
suspending devices, which is not the case in the generic suspend code.
> To summarize, the argument is that the freezer is deadlock-prone and
> ineffective.
I remain unconvinced. ;-)
Greetings,
Rafael
--
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil." - Donald Knuth
-
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]
