[lkml]   [2007]   [Jul]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [linux-pm] [PATCH] Remove process freezer from suspend to RAM pathway
On Tue, 3 Jul 2007, Matthew Garrett wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 06:21:42PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Tue, 3 Jul 2007, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > We're used to the idea of applications blocking when a resource they're
> > > using goes away - NFS has done it forever.
> >
> > You persist in evading my point. I'm not worried about applications;
> > I'm worried about drivers.
> >
> > Let me put it explicitly: You're writing a driver. You're working on
> > the read, write, or probe method. You add code to check if a system
> > sleep is underway. Suppose the answer is Yes -- what does your driver
> > do next?
> Leave the process blocked and defer any i/o until after resume. Why does
> it need to be any more complicated than that?

(1) The driver will undoubtedly hold some mutex or semaphore at the
time it checks whether a system sleep is underway. You will have to
drop it before blocking and then reacquire it afterward.

(2) The driver may have been called by some other routine which holds a
mutex needed for resuming the device. In this case the driver _can't_
drop the mutex and so the resume will deadlock.

Okay, I agree that (1) can be handled without too much effort. But
doing it adds an extra test to _every_ driver's I/O pathway. Freezing
userspace does not incur all this additional overhead.

(2) shouldn't arise during normal read and write operations, but it
certainly _will_ arise during probe.

Alan Stern

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: 2007-07-04 16:41    [W:0.487 / U:5.196 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site