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: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 09:16:01 +0200 From: Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz> To: Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@....com> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>, David Chinner <dgc@....com>, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>, xfs-masters@....sgi.com, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: freeze vs freezer Hi! (replying to *very* old mail). >>>> We wait until they can continue. >>> >>> So if I have a process blocked on an unavilable NFS mount, I can't >>> suspend? >> >> That's correct, you can't. >> >> [And I know what you're going to say. ;-)] > > Why exactly does suspend/hibernation depend on "TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE" instead > of a zero preempt_count()? Really what we should do is just iterate over > all of the actual physical devices and tell each one "Block new IO requests > preemptably, finish pending DMA, put the hardware in low-power mode, and > prepare for suspend/hibernate". As long as each driver knows how to do > those simple things we can have an entirely consistent kernel image for > both suspend and for hibernation. Patch would be welcome, actually. It turns out blocking new IO-requests is not completely trivial. 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists