[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070217234728.GA679@tv-sign.ru>
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 02:47:28 +0300
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc: ego@...ibm.com, akpm@...l.org, paulmck@...ibm.com, mingo@...e.hu,
vatsa@...ibm.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH(Experimental) 0/4] Freezer based Cpu-hotplug
On 02/18, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> On 02/17, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> > Alternatively, we can move the check into refrigerator(), like this:
> >
> > --- linux-2.6.20-git13.orig/kernel/power/process.c
> > +++ linux-2.6.20-git13/kernel/power/process.c
> > @@ -39,6 +39,11 @@ void refrigerator(void)
> > /* Hmm, should we be allowed to suspend when there are realtime
> > processes around? */
> > long save;
> > +
> > + /* Freeze the task unless there is a vfork completion pending */
> > + if (current->vfork_done)
> > + return;
> > +
>
> This means that "current" returns to user space (get_signal_to_deliver
> will clear TIF_SIGPENDING) and runs. While try_to_freeze_tasks() thinks
> it is frozen.
Ah, sorry. I am wrong, current has no PF_FROZEN yet.
However, this means that sys_vfork() makes impossible to freeze processes
until child exits/execs. Not good.
Oleg.
-
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