linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2.6.19 5/5] fs: freeze

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 9 Nov 2006 22:41:59 +0100
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc:	Alasdair G Kergon <agk@...hat.com>,
	Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	dm-devel@...hat.com, Srinivasa DS <srinivasa@...ibm.com>,
	Nigel Cunningham <nigel@...pend2.net>,
	David Chinner <dgc@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.19 5/5] fs: freeze_bdev with semaphore not mutex

Hi!

> > > This is from a work queue, so in fact from a process context, but from
> > > a process that is running with PF_NOFREEZE.
> > 
> > Why not simply &~ PF_NOFREEZE on that particular process? Filesystems
> > are free to use threads/work queues/whatever, but refrigerator should
> > mean "no writes to filesystem" for them...
> 
> But how we differentiate worker_threads used by filesystems from the
> other ones?

I'd expect filesystems to do &~ PF_NOFREEZE by hand.

> BTW, I think that worker_threads run with PF_NOFREEZE for a reason,
> but what exactly is it?

I do not think we had particulary good reasons...
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/