| 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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2007 08:58:03 +0200 From: Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org> To: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org> Cc: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>, Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, Linux-pm mailing list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>, Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>, Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org> Subject: Re: [linux-pm] Re: [PATCH] Remove process freezer from suspend to RAM pathway Am Donnerstag, 5. Juli 2007 schrieb Paul Mackerras: > > I have discussed the benefits elsewhere. As for the deadlocks -- do > > you still observe them if you use the version of the freezer which > > doesn't freeze kernel threads? > > In general the only way to guarantee there are no deadlocks is to > construct the graph of dependencies between tasks. Those dependencies > are not in practice observable from outside the tasks, so it is > virtually impossible to construct the graph. In which way can user space tasks depend on each other in a way that allows a them members of that cycle to be in uninterruptible sleep? Regards Oliver - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists