Hi. On Saturday 21 July 2007 21:44:32 Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > The problem with FUSE is related to the fact that the freezer can't > > freeze uninterruptible tasks and we said that perhaps we might avoid > > it if FUSE was made freezing-aware. Still, no one has gone in this > > direction and I don't know of any plans to do that. > > I thought we have fully explored this direction. Lots of emails, and > an IRC session with Pavel. Conclusion: What am I missing in the following suggested solution? 1) In the freezer code, we implement a new TIF_LATEFREEZE process flag, which, when set, causes a userspace process to be frozen with kernel threads instead of with userspace ones. When freezing, we freezing !TIF_LATEFREEZE, sync and then freeze TIF_LATEFREEZE and freezable kernel threads. 2) In the fuse code, the PID of the process that will do the work gets passed to the fuse kernel code when the mount is done. The kernel code sets the TIF_LATEFREEZE flag, and resets it on umount. Sorry, but this is a hit-and-run email - I'm off to bed now. Regards, Nigel
Attachment:
pgpq383JGcSoL.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [linux-pm] Re: Hibernation considerations
- From: Pavel Machek <[email protected]>
- Re: [linux-pm] Re: Hibernation considerations
- From: Jeremy Maitin-Shepard <[email protected]>
- Re: [linux-pm] Re: Hibernation considerations
- From: Alan Stern <[email protected]>
- Re: [linux-pm] Re: Hibernation considerations
- References:
- Re: Hibernation considerations
- From: [email protected]
- Re: [linux-pm] Re: Hibernation considerations
- From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[email protected]>
- Re: [linux-pm] Re: Hibernation considerations
- From: Miklos Szeredi <[email protected]>
- Re: Hibernation considerations
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] pi-futex: set PF_EXITING without taking ->pi_lock
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] compat_ioctl requires CONFIG_BLOCK
- Previous by thread: Re: [linux-pm] Re: Hibernation considerations
- Next by thread: Re: [linux-pm] Re: Hibernation considerations
- Index(es):
 |