[lkml]   [2007]   [Jul]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [linux-pm] Re: Hibernation considerations
    On Saturday, 21 July 2007 20:12, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
    > > It seems that you could still potentially get a failure to freeze if one
    > > FUSE process depends on another, and the one that is frozen second just
    > > happens to be waiting on the one that is frozen first when it is frozen.
    > > I admit that this situation is unlikely, and perhaps acceptable.
    > It isn't all that unlikely. There's sshfs for example, that depends
    > on a separate ssh process for transport.
    > Oh, there are also userspace network transports, like tun/tap,
    > nfqueue, etc. They could block any network filesystem (not just fuse)
    > if frozen first, making the freezer fail.
    > Hmm, wonder why this isn't affecting people with VPNs? Probably
    > network mounts over VPN are rare, and ever rarer to have fs activity
    > on them during suspend.
    > Anyway, I think it's long overdue to stop thinking about how to "fix"
    > fuse, and concentrate on fixing the underlying problem instead ;)

    To conclude this branch of the thread, I have a patch in the works that may
    help a bit with unfreezable FUSE filesystems and it only affects the freezer.
    I'll post it when 2.6.23-rc1 is out, because it's on top of some other patches
    that need to go first.


    "Premature optimization is the root of all evil." - Donald Knuth
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2007-07-21 21:15    [W:0.020 / U:7.056 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site