linux-kernel - Re: question on resume()

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-Id: <200701310949.04110.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date:	Wed, 31 Jan 2007 09:49:03 +0100
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.name>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, nigel@...el.suspend2.net,
	pm list <linux-pm@...ts.osdl.org>
Subject: Re: question on resume()

On Wednesday, 31 January 2007 09:40, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 31. Januar 2007 09:33 schrieb Rafael J. Wysocki:
> > On Tuesday, 30 January 2007 23:32, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> 
> > > Generally, you are safe if your driver only calls wake_up() from a process
> > > context, but not from .resume() or .suspend() routines (or from an
> > > unfreezeable kernel thread).
> > 
> > Ah, sorry, I've just realized I was wrong.  Processes in TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE
> > cannot be frozen!  So, the above only applies to wake_up_interruptible().
> 
> So the kernel will wait for tasks in TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE to finish IO
> before it calls suspend()? I am confused.

Yes, it will.  The process freezer can only return success if there are no more
TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks.  Otherwise it fails (after a timeout).

Greetings,
Rafael


-- 
If you don't have the time to read,
you don't have the time or the tools to write.
		- Stephen King
-
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/