linux-kernel - Re: [linux-pm] Freezer: Don't count threads waiting for frozen filesystems.

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: <200810282300.31164.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date:	Tue, 28 Oct 2008 23:00:30 +0100
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc:	ncunningham@...a.org.au, linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] Freezer: Don't count threads waiting for frozen filesystems.

On Tuesday, 28 of October 2008, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Oct 2008, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > > However it does not fix the freezing of tasks which are waiting for
> > > VFS locks (i.e. inode->i_mutex) held by the outstanding fuse requests.
> > > This is the tricky part...
> > 
> > Convert them all to wait_event_freezeable.
> 
> You mean convert mutexes to event queues?  Not a very good idea.
> 
> I fear we are going down the same path as the last time.  I still
> don't think rewriting the VFS is the right solution to the freezing
> problem.  But hey, if you want, sumbit a patch or an RFD and lets see
> what others think.

So, what solution would you prefer?

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/