lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Apr]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Back to the future.
On Sat, 28 Apr 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

> On Saturday, 28 April 2007 20:32, David Lang wrote:
>> On Sat, 28 Apr 2007, Pavel Machek wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> We freeze user space processes for the reasons that you have quoted above.
>>>>
>>>> Why we freeze kernel threads in there too is a good question, but not for me to
>>>> answer. I don't know. Pavel should know, I think.
>>>
>>> We do not want kernel threads running:
>>>
>>> a) they may hold some locks and deadlock suspend
>>>
>>> b) they may do some writes to disk, leading to corruption
>>>
>>> We could solve a) by carefully auditing suspend lock usage to make
>>> sure deadlocks are impossible even with kernel threads running.
>>
>> remember that we are doing suspend-to-disk, after we do the snapshot we will be
>> doing a shutdown. that should simplify the locking issues
>
> That's assuming that we won't need to cancel the hibernation.

true, but if we cancel the hibernation then why are the locks an issue? they are
appropriate for the system state.

David Lang
-
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: 2007-04-28 21:25    [W:0.153 / U:0.396 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site