Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 30 Jun 2008 02:11:50 -0400 | From | Christoph Hellwig <> | Subject | Re: [xfs-masters] Re: freeze vs freezer |
| |
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 01:22:47AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > Actually, I believe requirements are same. > > > > > > 'don't do i/o in dangerous period'. > > > > > > swsusp will just do sync() before entering dangerous period. That > > > provides consistent-enough state... > > > > As I've said many times before - if the requirement is "don't do > > I/O" then you have to freeze the filesystem. In no way does 'sync' > > prevent filesystems from doing I/O..... > > Well, it seems we can handle this on the block layer level, by temporarily > replacing the elevator with something that will selectively prevent fs I/O > from reaching the layers below it. > > I talked with Jens about it on a very general level, but it seems doable at > first sight.
Why would you hack the blok layer when we already have a perfectly fine facility to archive what you want? freeze_bdev is there exactly for the purpose to make the filesystem consistant on disk and then freeze all I/O.
| |