Re: Towards eliminating the freezer

[Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>]

On Tue, 24 Jul 2007, Oliver Neukum wrote:

> Am Montag 23 Juli 2007 schrieb Alan Stern:
> > Now here's an idea which might work.  Can we require every caller of
> > device_add() to hold some existing device's semaphore?  Normally it
> > would be the semaphore of the new device's parent, but it could be a
> > higher ancestor.  There even could be a single "root" semaphore for
> > drivers registering a top-level device with no parent.
> 
> What prevents us from having a device addition semaphore?
> Adding device is not critical to performance, is it?

It would create a locking order violation.  Many drivers hold a device
semaphore while registering a child device, so they would acquire your
new semaphore while holding a device sem.  But the PM core needs to
prevent registration while calling suspend() methods, so it would need
to acquire the device sems while holding your new semaphore.

Alan Stern

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/