[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <E1I6NAH-00008t-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu>
Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 10:58:17 +0200
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To: oliver@...kum.org
CC: miklos@...redi.hu, paulus@...ba.org, stern@...land.harvard.edu,
johannes@...solutions.net, rjw@...k.pl,
linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
pavel@....cz, mjg59@...f.ucam.org, benh@...nel.crashing.org
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] Re: [PATCH] Remove process freezer from suspend to RAM pathway
> > And teach VFS to block suspension, while waiting on a mutex held by
> > another process performing a fuse operation.
> >
> > I can already hear the beautiful praise from Al Viro at the sight of
> > that ;)
>
> There is that.
>
> OK, bite the bullet. Tasks involved in fuse are special. Give them a flag
> and teach the freezer to put them on ice only after all other task are
> frozen. In a way they are kernel, there's no use denying that.
And flag every other process, that the flagged process is
communicating with? How are you proposing to do that?
Quoting Paul:
"1. The freezer cannot be guaranteed deadlock-free without constructing
a dependency graph between tasks (both user and kernel), which is
virtually impossible since the dependencies are not externally
observable."
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