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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200705152254.28911.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date:	Tue, 15 May 2007 22:54:27 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Alex Dubov <oakad@...oo.com>
Cc:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Michal Piotrowski <michal.k.k.piotrowski@...il.com>,
	Pierre Ossman <drzeus@...eus.cx>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Freezeable workqueues [Was: 2.6.22-rc1: Broken suspend on SMP with tifm]

On Tuesday, 15 May 2007 02:56, Alex Dubov wrote:
> > 
> > > > 	- Do we need freezeable workqueues ?
> > > 
> > > Well, we have at least one case in which they appear to be useful.
> > 
> 
> I need freezeable wq exactly for the fact that they are synchronized with suspend/resume. My
> workitem may do device_register/unregister and it can (and will be) scheduled from irq handler
> during resume. As far as I understand, before freezeable wqs, kthreads were the only way to
> achieve this behavior,

That's correct.

> which is less convenient.

Thanks for the explanation. 

Greetings,
Rafael
-
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ