On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 17:44:47 +0100 "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I need to look at all uses of PF_NOFREEZE -- as I understand the > > code, processes marked PF_NOFREEZE will continue running, potentially > > interfering with the hotplug operation. :-( > > > > I will pass my findings on to this list. > > Well, I did it some time ago, although not very thoroughly. > > AFAICS there are not so many, but one that stands out is the worker threads. > We needed two of them to actually go to sleep, so now it's possible to create > a "freezeable workqueue" the worker thread of which will not set PF_NOFREEZE, > but currently this is only used by XFS. Or we can create a variant of freeze_processes which ignores PF_NOFREEZE. As I said eariler, we might need to change the freezer code for this application. In fact we should do so: that sys_sync() call in there is quite inappropriate, as is, I suppose, the two-pass freeze attempt. As are the nice printks, come to that. Pretty simple stuff though. - 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/
