On Tue, Jan 09, 2007 at 01:51:52AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > This thread makes absolutely -no- calls to try_to_freeze() in its lifetime. > > Looks like a bug to me. powerpc does appear to try to support the freezer. > > > 1. Does this mean that the thread can't be frozen? (lets say that the > > thread's PF_NOFREEZE is not set) > > yup. I'd expect the freeze_processes() call would fail if this thread is > running.
ok. > > > AFAICS it can still be frozen by sending it a signal and have the signal > > delivery code call try_to_freeze() .. > > kernel threads don't take signals in the same manner as userspace. A > kernel thread needs to explicitly poll, via > > if (signal_pending(current)) > do_something() Thanks for the education! I feel much better about the use of process freezer now .. > > 2. If the thread can be frozen at any arbitrary point of its execution, > > then I > > dont see what prevents cpu_online_map from changing under the feet of > > rtasd > > thread, > > It cannot. Excellent .. I just hope the latency of freeze_processes() is tolerable .. -- Regards, vatsa - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
