Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Remove process freezer from suspend to RAM pathway | From | Benjamin Herrenschmidt <> | Date | Wed, 04 Jul 2007 09:08:31 +1000 |
| |
On Wed, 2007-07-04 at 00:04 +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote: > Am Dienstag, 3. Juli 2007 schrieb Benjamin Herrenschmidt: > > On Tue, 2007-07-03 at 23:48 +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > > Am Dienstag, 3. Juli 2007 schrieb Benjamin Herrenschmidt: > > > > On Tue, 2007-07-03 at 21:32 +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > > > > > I'm not sure why this can't be made atomic, but assuming, that it > > > > > > can't, fuse should still not need to be implicated. If it is, > > > > > that's > > > > > > an indication about something wrong in the suspend procedure. > > > > > > > > > > Nope, something's wrong in fuse. You must be able to deal with sync > > > > > until every task is frozen. > > > > > > > > Pipe dream > > > > > > Then tell me how you want to avoid that condition. > > > > Don't freeze :-) > > Then you will have to deal with all syscalls unfrozen tasks can make.
Yup, and the majority of them is totally harmless. Looks like people around here have a problem with the idea of writing robust drivers ...
Ben.
- 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/
| |