lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Nov]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2.6.19 5/5] fs: freeze_bdev with semaphore not mutex
On Fri 2006-11-10 11:57:49, David Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 09, 2006 at 11:21:46PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > I think we can add a flag to __create_workqueue() that will indicate if
> > this one is to be running with PF_NOFREEZE and a corresponding macro like
> > create_freezable_workqueue() to be used wherever we want the worker thread
> > to freeze (in which case it should be calling try_to_freeze() somewhere).
> > Then, we can teach filesystems to use this macro instead of
> > create_workqueue().
>
> At what point does the workqueue get frozen? i.e. how does this
> guarantee an unfrozen filesystem will end up in a consistent
> state?

Snapshot is atomic; workqueue will be unfrozen with everyone else, but
as there were no writes in the meantime, there should be no problems.

Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-11-10 11:43    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans