[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111201154722.GB12668@google.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2011 07:47:22 -0800
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: rjw@...k.pl, pavel@....cz, len.brown@...el.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PM / Hibernate: Thaw processes in
SNAPSHOT_CREATE_IMAGE ioctl error/test paths
On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 06:45:37PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> Commit 2aede851ddf08666f68ffc17be446420e9d2a056 (PM / Hibernate: Freeze
> kernel threads after preallocating memory) moved the freezing of kernel
> threads to hibernation_snapshot() function.
>
> So now, if the call to hibernation_snapshot() fails or returns early due
> to a successful hibernation test, the caller has to thaw processes to
> ensure that the system gets back to its original state.
>
> But in SNAPSHOT_CREATE_IMAGE hibernation ioctl, the caller does not thaw
> processes. Fix this issue. But note that if hibernation_snapshot() returned
> due to a successful freezer test, we still send the value of 'in_suspend'
> (which is now 0) to userspace, because we are not in an error path per-se,
> and moreover, the value of in_suspend correctly depicts the situation here.
>
> Signed-off-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Is this still applicable on top of pm-freezer branch?
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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