[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070228091053.GA15509@in.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 14:40:53 +0530
From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ibm.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>,
Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Problem with freezable workqueues
On Wed, Feb 28, 2007 at 11:48:59AM +0300, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 02/28, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> > We can just thaw the worker thread selectively before kthread_stopping
> > them. This will let us freeze all worker threads (which we want to for
> > hotplug anyway).
>
> I am not sure this is a good change for 2.6.21.
So we make that change when merging the freezer-based hotplug patchset?
> I strongly believe it is better to change XFS so that it doesn't use
> create_freezeable_workqueue() as Rafael suggested.
Ok no issues. But when we enable freezer-based hotplug, we expect all
non-singlethreaded worker threads to be frozen (for hotplug atleast).
> Besides, freezeable workqueues are buggy anyway in 2.6.21-rc,
>
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=116855740612755
>
> This means that workqueues become non-freezeable after suspend/resume
> anyway (if I understand disable_nonboot_cpus() correctly).
Ah ok. When is the above patch expected to be merged?
--
Regards,
vatsa
-
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