[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <E1I60CR-00066n-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu>
Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 10:26:59 +0200
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To: paulus@...ba.org
CC: miklos@...redi.hu, oliver@...kum.org, benh@...nel.crashing.org,
mjg59@...f.ucam.org, linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] Re: [PATCH] Remove process freezer from suspend to RAM
pathway
> > That's weird, I never had a suspend problem due to a fuse mount,
> > though I have them all the time. And I suspect, that even the sync()
>
> Well, I don't either, because we don't freeze processes on
> powerbooks. But I have heard that other people have problems with
> suspending with a fuse filesystem mounted. Maybe the difference is
> whether or not the filesystem is writable?
>
> > thing that suspend does is not the real cause, because sync() actually
> > does nothing in fuse filesystems.
>
> It's not the filesystem sync method, as I understand it, it's that if
> there are dirty pages in the page cache for files on the fuse
> filesystem,
Currently fuse doesn't produce dirty pages. Normal writes are done
synchronously, and writable mmap is not supported. So sync() should
really be a no-op for fuse.
> the system will initiate a write-out on them and wait for it to
> finish. But if the fuse userspace is frozen, the write-out will
> never complete.
Maybe there is some other fs operation being done, possibly not
directly, but by waiting for a kernel thread, that does that.
It would be nice, if someone who can reproduce the deadlock could
debug it. Does sysrq still work during suspend?
Miklos
-
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