On Saturday, 17 of November 2007, Franck Bui-Huu wrote:
> Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > However, using PF_NOFREEZE to prevent this from happening doesn't seem to be
> > a good idea.
> >
>
> Indeed but...
>
> > I'd probably use wait_event_freezable() (defined in
> > include/linux/freezer.h) for that.
>
> ...I would just revert this bits from now to make sure this driver
> work again for v2.6.24.
I'd prefer not to.
The PF_NOFREEZE was not present in 2.6.23 already and I wouldn't like to
reintroduce it now.
Why do you think that using wait_event_freezable() would not work, BTW?
> > It tries to send them fake signals and waits for them to freeze. If
> > they don't freeze within the timeout, it fails and clears their
> > TIF_FREEZE bits.
>
> But send_fake_signal() seems to wake up task in INTERRUPTIBLE state
> only. Looking at signal_wake_up(), it basically do:
>
> wake_up_state(t, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
>
> What am I missing ?
Nothing. :-)
I didn't remember the change that made the freezer use TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE
explicitly in there (should have looked at the current code before replying).
Greetings,
Rafael
-
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]
