linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -mm 0/2] Use freezeable workqueues to avoid suspend-related XFS corruptions

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 21 Nov 2006 12:19:52 +0100
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	nigelc@....st
Cc:	David Chinner <dgc@....com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm 0/2] Use freezeable workqueues to avoid suspend-related XFS corruptions

Hi,

On Tuesday, 21 November 2006 01:51, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> Hi.
> 
> On Mon, 2006-11-20 at 23:55 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday, 20 November 2006 23:39, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > > (Sorry to reply again)
> > 
> > (No big deal)
> > 
> > > On Tue, 2006-11-21 at 09:26 +1100, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > > > Hi.
> > > > 
> > > > On Mon, 2006-11-20 at 23:18 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > > I think I/O can only be submitted from the process context.  Thus if we freeze
> > > > > all (and I mean _all_) threads that are used by filesystems, including worker
> > > > > threads, we should effectively prevent fs-related I/O from being submitted
> > > > > after tasks have been frozen.
> > > > 
> > > > I know that will work. It's what I used to do before the switch to bdev
> > > > freezing. I guess I need to look again at why I made the switch. Perhaps
> > > > it was just because you guys gave freezing kthreads a bad wrap as too
> > > > invasive or something. Bdev freezing is certainly fewer lines of code.
> > > 
> > > No, it looks like I wrongly believed that XFS was submitting I/O off a
> > > timer, so that freezing kthreads wasn't enough. In that case, it looks
> > > like freezing kthreads should be a good solution.
> > 
> > Okay, so let's implement it. :-)
> 
> Agreed. I'm a bit confused now about what the latest version of your
> patches is, but I'll be happy to switch back to kthread freezing in the
> next Suspend2 release if it will help with getting them wider testing.

The latest are:

support-for-freezeable-workqueues.patch
use-freezeable-workqueues-in-xfs.patch

(both attached for convenience) and the freezing of bdevs patch has been
dropped.

Greetings,
Rafael


-- 
You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
		R. Buckminster Fuller

View attachment "support-for-freezeable-workqueues.patch" of type "text/x-diff" (4019 bytes)

View attachment "use-freezeable-workqueues-in-xfs.patch" of type "text/x-diff" (774 bytes)