[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4EB6BF72.3070509@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2011 22:40:10 +0530
From: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
CC: rjw@...k.pl, paul@...lmenage.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, arnd@...db.de, oleg@...hat.com,
matthltc@...ibm.com, Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/17] freezer: rename thaw_process() to __thaw_task()
and simplify the implementation
On 11/06/2011 10:21 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 05:34:27PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
>> On 11/01/2011 12:35 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
>>> * task_lock() is needed to prevent the race with refrigerator() which may
>> ^^^^^^
>> __refrigerator()?
>
> I don't think this really matters. Maybe just drop () from the
> comment?
Sure, that would do. It was rather trivial anyway...
>
>> Rebasing to latest kernel, we need to do the conversion in mm/oom_kill.c as well,
>> (and consequently add __thaw_task() empty function under !CONFIG_FREEZER, in
>> include/linux/freezer.h)
>
> Yes, for merging, we should do that, but for longer term, as we can
> modify freezing condition with relative ease now, I think we should
> make tasks being killed ignore freezer instead of relying on
> explicitly calling __thaw_task() which is inherently racy.
>
OK.. And yes, many thanks for your efforts to stabilize the freezer
subsystem :)
Thanks,
Srivatsa S. Bhat
--
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