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: <1225231405.9661.18.camel@nigel-laptop>
Date:	Wed, 29 Oct 2008 09:03:25 +1100
From:	Nigel Cunningham <ncunningham@...a.org.au>
To:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc:	rjw@...k.pl, linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] Freezer: Don't count threads waiting for frozen
	filesystems.

Hi.

On Tue, 2008-10-28 at 22:51 +0100, 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.

No, I don't. Sorry. I was thinking you were referring to the wait_event
calls in the fuse request code. My bad.

Perhaps it's best to go back to my original position: hold new requests
and allow existing ones to complete. I'll look again at previous
messages to see why you thought that was problematic.

Regards,

Nigel

--
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/