[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080623071601.GA1553@elf.ucw.cz>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 09:16:01 +0200
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.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!
(replying to *very* old mail).
>>>> 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.
Patch would be welcome, actually. It turns out blocking new
IO-requests is not completely trivial.
Pavel
--
(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