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    [W:0.021 / U:0.448 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site