[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080102160234.GA17070@ucw.cz>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 17:02:34 +0100
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To: Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@....com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
David Chinner <dgc@....com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>, xfs-masters@....sgi.com,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: freeze vs freezer
Hi!
> >>>>So how do you handle threads that are blocked on I/O or a lock
> >>>>during the system freeze process, then?
> >>>
> >>>We wait until they can continue.
> >>
> >>So if I have a process blocked on an unavilable NFS mount, I can't
> >>suspend?
> >
> >That's correct, you can't.
> >
> >[And I know what you're going to say. ;-)]
>
> Why exactly does suspend/hibernation depend on "TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE"
> instead of a zero preempt_count()? Really what we should do is just
> iterate over all of the actual physical devices and tell each one
> "Block new IO requests preemptably, finish pending DMA, put the
> hardware in low-power mode, and prepare for suspend/hibernate". As
> long as each driver knows how to do those simple things we can have
> an entirely consistent kernel image for both suspend and for
> hibernation.
"each driver" means this is a lot of work. But yes, that is probably
way to go, and patch would be welcome.
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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