[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201110112119.06547.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 21:19:06 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, trond.myklebust@...app.com,
smfrench@...il.com, linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org,
john@...va.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] allow freezing of tasks with netfs calls in flight
On Tuesday, October 11, 2011, Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 08:18:19 +0200
> Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> wrote:
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > > We've had a number of reports recently of people with NFS and CIFS
> > > mounts that were unable to suspend or hibernate their machines. Here
> > > are a couple of Fedora bugs that illustrate the problem:
> > >
> > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=712088
> > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=717735
> > >
> > > When it occurs the problem is pretty clear. We have a task that's
> > > sleeping in the kernel in TASK_KILLABLE sleep, generally waiting
> > > for a reply to come in. Often though, userspace has already taken
> > > down the interface so that reply will never come. The process then
> > > fails to freeze and the suspend fails.
> >
> > Userspace should not take interface down for suspend (*). Why do that?
> >
>
> I suspect that NetworkManager does this to try and allow for the case
> where someone suspends their laptop and then wanders off to another
> network and then resumes.
That's correct.
> Either way, we still want to allow suspend and hibernate to work regardless
> of what userspace does during the process.
Very true. :-)
Thanks,
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