lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Nov]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2.6.19 5/5] fs: freeze_bdev with semaphore not mutex
Date
Hi,

On Thursday, 9 November 2006 22:17, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > > OTOH I have no idea _how_ we can tell xfs that the processes have been
> > > > frozen. Should we introduce a global flag for that or something?
> > >
> > > I guess XFS should just do all the writes from process context, and
> > > refuse any writing when its threads are frozen... I actually still
> > > believe it is doing the right thing, because you can't really write to
> > > disk from timer.
> >
> > This is from a work queue, so in fact from a process context, but from
> > a process that is running with PF_NOFREEZE.
>
> Why not simply &~ PF_NOFREEZE on that particular process? Filesystems
> are free to use threads/work queues/whatever, but refrigerator should
> mean "no writes to filesystem" for them...

But how we differentiate worker_threads used by filesystems from the
other ones?

BTW, I think that worker_threads run with PF_NOFREEZE for a reason,
but what exactly is it?

Rafael


--
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 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: 2006-11-09 22:25    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans