[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201001192134.11518.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 21:34:11 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To: Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org>
Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@...il.com>,
"linux-mm" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [linux-pm] [RFC][PATCH] PM: Force GFP_NOIO during suspend/resume (was: Re: Memory allocations in .suspend became very unreliable)
On Tuesday 19 January 2010, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> Am Montag, 18. Januar 2010 22:06:36 schrieb Rafael J. Wysocki:
> > I was concerned about another problem, though, which is what happens if the
> > suspend process runs in parallel with a memory allocation that started earlier
> > and happens to do some I/O. I that case the suspend process doesn't know
> > about the I/O done by the mm subsystem and may disturb it in principle.
>
> How could this happen? Who would allocate that memory?
> Tasks won't be frozen while they are allocating memory.
The majority of kernel threads are not freezable, but I agree it's rather low
risk.
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists