[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2254911.sCQ2smOA47@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2015 05:06:01 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc: Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] PM, vfs: use filesystem freezing instead of kthread freezer
On Tuesday, November 03, 2015 11:10:53 AM Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 03:43:07AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > I guess it may also helps to address the case when a device is removed from a
> > suspended system, written to on another system in the meantime and inserted
> > back into the (still suspended) original system which then is resumed. Today
> > this is an almost guaranteed data corruption scenario, but if the filesystem in
> > question is properly frozen during suspend, the driver should be able to detect
> > superblock changes during unfreeze.
>
> Never going to work. There is no guarantee that a write to a
> filesystem by a third party device is going to change the superblock
> (or any metadata in the rest of the filesystem) in any detectable
> way. Hence freezing filesystems will not prevent Bad Things
> Happening if you do this while your system is suspended.
OK, thanks for the clarification.
Cheers,
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