lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Oct]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [linux-pm] Freezer: Don't count threads waiting for frozen filesystems.
From
Date
Hi.

On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 00:12 +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Oct 2008, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > > However it does not fix the freezing of tasks which are waiting for
> > > VFS locks (i.e. inode->i_mutex) held by the outstanding fuse requests.
> > > This is the tricky part...
> >
> > Okay. Looking back on our conversation brought me back to this message,
> > which I think needs another reply.
> >
> > If we take the strategy of holding new requests and allowing existing
> > ones to complete, then am I right in thinking that we only need to worry
> > about where inode->i_mutex is taken in fs/fuse/file.c (I don't see it
> > taken in other fs/fuse/*.c files).
>
> Nope, i_mutex is usually taken by the VFS not the filesystem. That
> means that the filesystem is called with the mutex already held. Try
> "grep i_mutex fs/*.c". There's also sb->s_vfs_rename_mutex, for all
> the gory details see Documentation/filesystems/Locking.
>
> So it's not just having to fix fuse, it's having to "fix" the VFS as
> well.

Remember, though, that we're only freezing fuse at the moment, and
strictly one filesystem at a time. We can thus happily wait for the
i_mutex taken by some other process to be released.

Regards,

Nigel



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-10-29 00:21    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans