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    [W:0.023 / U:1.796 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site