lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jul]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [linux-pm] Re: [PATCH] Remove process freezer from suspend to RAM pathway
From
Date
> > > > > I have discussed the benefits elsewhere.  As for the deadlocks -- do 
> > > > > you still observe them if you use the version of the freezer which
> > > > > doesn't freeze kernel threads?
> > > >
> > > > In general the only way to guarantee there are no deadlocks is to
> > > > construct the graph of dependencies between tasks.  Those dependencies
> > > > are not in practice observable from outside the tasks, so it is
> > > > virtually impossible to construct the graph.
> > >
> > > In which way can user space tasks depend on each other in a way that
> > > allows a them members of that cycle to be in uninterruptible sleep?
> >
> >  - process A calls rename() on a fuse fs
> >  - process B, the fuse server, starts to process the rename request
> >  - process B is frozen before it can reply
> >
> > Now process A is unfreezable.  We cannot make rename() restartable,
> > hence it cannot be interruptible.
>
> Then this is a problem specific to fuse. You should teach fuse to block
> suspension while such operations are being performed.

And teach VFS to block suspension, while waiting on a mutex held by
another process performing a fuse operation.

I can already hear the beautiful praise from Al Viro at the sight of
that ;)

Miklos
-
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: 2007-07-05 10:45    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean