[lkml]   [2006]   [Nov]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH -mm 0/2] Use freezeable workqueues to avoid suspend-related XFS corruptions
    On Monday, 20 November 2006 23:39, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
    > (Sorry to reply again)

    (No big deal)

    > On Tue, 2006-11-21 at 09:26 +1100, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
    > > Hi.
    > >
    > > On Mon, 2006-11-20 at 23:18 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
    > > > I think I/O can only be submitted from the process context. Thus if we freeze
    > > > all (and I mean _all_) threads that are used by filesystems, including worker
    > > > threads, we should effectively prevent fs-related I/O from being submitted
    > > > after tasks have been frozen.
    > >
    > > I know that will work. It's what I used to do before the switch to bdev
    > > freezing. I guess I need to look again at why I made the switch. Perhaps
    > > it was just because you guys gave freezing kthreads a bad wrap as too
    > > invasive or something. Bdev freezing is certainly fewer lines of code.
    > No, it looks like I wrongly believed that XFS was submitting I/O off a
    > timer, so that freezing kthreads wasn't enough. In that case, it looks
    > like freezing kthreads should be a good solution.

    Okay, so let's implement it. :-)


    You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
    R. Buckminster Fuller
    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: 2006-11-21 00:01    [W:0.031 / U:8.832 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site