[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2054754.LytUAbbREV@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2013 00:23:10 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
Linux-pm mailing list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: No freezing of kernel threads (was: Re: [GIT PULL] libata fixes for v3.13-rc5)
On Thursday, December 26, 2013 02:01:20 PM Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hey,
>
> On Thu, Dec 26, 2013 at 01:42:29PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > In the case of hibernation, it's not so simple. We do need to perform
> > I/O, in order to save the memory image. But we also need to avoid
> > unnecessary I/O, in order to keep the on-disk data consistent with the
> > data in the memory image. You probably can't accomplish this at the
> > device driver or subsystem level.
>
> That was what I assumed too but Rafael tells me it has nothing to do
> with hibernation.
It doesn't prevent on-disk data corruption from happening in case of a failing
hibernation. In case of a successful hibernation it is key to keep on-disk
data in sync with the contents of the image, but relying on the freezing
for that is rather not a winning strategy, so to speak. It would be better
to freeze filesystems instead (which has been discussed in another thread
recently).
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