[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 10:00:27 -0700
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: rjw@...k.pl, bp@...64.org, pavel@....cz, len.brown@...el.com,
mingo@...e.hu, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
suresh.b.siddha@...el.com, lucas.demarchi@...fusion.mobi,
rusty@...tcorp.com.au, rdunlap@...otime.net,
vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, ashok.raj@...el.com,
tigran@...azian.fsnet.co.uk, tglx@...utronix.de, hpa@...or.com,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] Mutually exclude cpu online and
suspend/hibernate
Hello,
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 06:15:20PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> Would it be better to hook into the suspend/hibernate notifiers and
> use them to exclude cpu hotplug from suspend/hibernate, instead of
> trying to take pm_mutex lock like this?
If this change is determined to be necessary, I think it would be
better to make it explicit. Exclusion through callbacks often makes
the locking just more obscure.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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