[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1305031017030.1513-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
Date: Fri, 3 May 2013 10:18:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
cc: Colin Cross <ccross@...roid.com>,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>,
Mandeep Baines <msb@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/10] freezer: add new freezable helpers using
freezer_do_not_count()
On Thu, 2 May 2013, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Combined with the locking problems, I was planning to update the
> freezer such that the frozen state is implemented as a form of jobctl
> stop, so that things like ptrace / kill -9 could work on them and we
> also have the clear definition of the frozen state rather than the
> current "it may get stuck somewhere in the kernel".
>
> But that conflicts with what you're doing here which seems pretty
> useful, so, to satisfy both goals, when somebody needs to put a
> pseudo-frozen task into the actual frozen jobctl stop, those spots
> which are currently using try_to_stop() would have to return an error,
> most likely -EINTR with TIF_SIGPENDING set, and the control should
> return towards userland so that signal handling path can be invoked.
> ie. It should be possible to steer the tasks which are considered
> frozen but not in the frozen jobctl stop into the jobctl stop without
> any side effect. To do that, those spots basically have to be pretty
> close to the userland boundary where it can easily leave the kernel
> with -EINTR and AFAICS all the spots that you converted are like that
> (which I think is natural). While not holding any locks doesn't
> guarantee that, I think there'd be a fairly high correlation at least
> and it'd be able to drive people towards finding out what's going on.
Don't forget about freezable kernel threads. They never cross the
kernel/user boundary.
Alan Stern
--
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