| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20061109214159.GB2616@elf.ucw.cz> 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists