linux-kernel - Re: [patch 128/197] freezer: add try_to

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4641A5F1.5080901@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Date:	Wed, 09 May 2007 12:44:01 +0200
From:	Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
To:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org
CC:	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, rjw@...k.pl,
	James.Bottomley@...elEye.com, aneesh.kumar@...il.com,
	drzeus@...eus.cx, dwmw2@...radead.org, ego@...ibm.com,
	greg@...ah.com, mingo@...e.hu, neilb@...e.de, oleg@...sign.ru,
	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, pavel@....cz, vatsa@...ibm.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 128/197] freezer: add try_to_freeze calls to all kernel
 threads

akpm@...ux-foundation.org wrote:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl>
> 
> Add try_to_freeze() calls to the remaining kernel threads that do not call
> try_to_freeze() already, although they set PF_NOFREEZE.
> 
> In the future we are going to replace PF_NOFREEZE with a set of flags that
> will be set to indicate in which situations the task should not be frozen (for
> example, there can be a task that should be frozen for the CPU hotplugging and
> should not be frozen for the system suspend).  For this reason every kernel
> thread should be able to freeze itself (ie.  call try_to_freeze()), so that it
> can be frozen whenever necessary.

A few questions:

Does try_to_freeze()'s kerneldoc document that try_to_freeze() is a
no-op sometimes but should nevertheless be called for this and that
reason?  (I don't know the entire patch series.)

Why add no-op-try_to_freeze() everywhere now, instead of adding it later
when it will actually be needed?  (I.e. "in the future".)

Can we please have a future where no device driver has to care if and
when and how to freeze its threads?
-- 
Stefan Richter
-=====-=-=== -=-= -=--=
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
-
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/