[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181203123857.GS31738@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2018 13:38:57 +0100
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Chanho Min <chanho.min@....com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "exec: make de_thread() freezable (was: Re: Linux
4.20-rc4)
On Mon 03-12-18 13:31:49, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 12/03, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > Now, I wouldn't mind to revert this because the code is really old and
> > we haven't seen many bug reports about failing suspend yet. But what is
> > the actual plan to make this work properly?
>
> I don't see a simple solution...
>
> But we need to fix exec/de_thread anyway, then we can probably reconsider
> this patch.
My concern is that de_thread fix might be too disruptive for stable
kernels while we might want to have a simple enough fix for the the
suspend issue in the meantime. That was actually the primary reason I've
acked the hack even though I didn't like it.
So can we find a way to shut the lockdep up when this is not really a
deadlock? Or maybe this really is one and then we need a real fix for
stable as well.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists