[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20061108023039.GF30653@agk.surrey.redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 02:30:39 +0000
From: Alasdair G Kergon <agk@...hat.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dm-devel@...hat.com,
Srinivasa DS <srinivasa@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.19 5/5] fs: freeze_bdev with semaphore not mutex
On Tue, Nov 07, 2006 at 11:49:51PM +0000, Alasdair G Kergon wrote:
> I hadn't noticed that -mm patch. I'll take a look.
swsusp-freeze-filesystems-during-suspend-rev-2.patch
I think you need to give more thought to device-mapper
interactions here. If an underlying device is suspended
by device-mapper without freezing the filesystem (the
normal state) and you issue a freeze_bdev on a device
above it, the freeze_bdev may never return if it attempts
any synchronous I/O (as it should).
Try:
while process generating I/O to filesystem on LVM
issue dmsetup suspend --nolockfs (which the lvm2 tools often do)
try your freeze_filesystems()
Maybe: don't allow freeze_filesystems() to run when the system is in that
state; or, use device-mapper suspend instead of freeze_bdev directly where
dm is involved; or skip dm devices that are already frozen - all with
appropriate dependency tracking to process devices in the right order.
Alasdair
--
agk@...hat.com
-
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