On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 09:42:47AM +0900, Kyungmin Park wrote:
> Right, it's still in freezer, just one time scheduling is happened.
> and enter freeze state again.
>
> do you think can we avoid it or it's sub-optimal to do as patch?
I mean, it's suboptimal. I'm not sure it actually matters tho.
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 11:43 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 04:47:14PM +0900, Kyungmin Park wrote:
>> > The kernel 3.10 is not working as expected, but right the latest
>> > kernel is working correctly.
>>
>> Please ignore it. test is wrong and it's not working, see Krz
Hello,
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 04:47:14PM +0900, Kyungmin Park wrote:
> > The kernel 3.10 is not working as expected, but right the latest
> > kernel is working correctly.
>
> Please ignore it. test is wrong and it's not working, see Krzysztof Mail.
So, I just tested and it does work as expected
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 03:33:10PM +0900, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > Yes, they should and I'm not sure why what you're saying is happening
> > because freezing() test done from the frozen tasks themselves should
> > keep them in the freezer. Which kernel version did you test? Can you
> > plea
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 1:28 PM, Kyungmin Park wrote:
> On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 12:25 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> Hello, Kyungmin.
>>
>> On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 09:04:26AM +0900, Kyungmin Park wrote:
>>> > I need to think more about it but as an *optimization* we can add
>>> > freezing() test before a
2015-05-09 0:25 GMT+09:00 Tejun Heo :
> Hello, Kyungmin.
>
> On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 09:04:26AM +0900, Kyungmin Park wrote:
>> > I need to think more about it but as an *optimization* we can add
>> > freezing() test before actually waking tasks up during resume, but can
>> > you please clarify what
On Sat, May 9, 2015 at 12:25 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Kyungmin.
>
> On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 09:04:26AM +0900, Kyungmin Park wrote:
>> > I need to think more about it but as an *optimization* we can add
>> > freezing() test before actually waking tasks up during resume, but can
>> > you please
Hello, Kyungmin.
On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 09:04:26AM +0900, Kyungmin Park wrote:
> > I need to think more about it but as an *optimization* we can add
> > freezing() test before actually waking tasks up during resume, but can
> > you please clarify what you're seeing?
>
> The mobile application ha
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 12:42 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 03:45:57PM +0900, Kyungmin Park wrote:
>> From: Kyungmin Park
>>
>> Some platform uses freezer cgroup for speicial purpose to schedule out some
>> applications. but after suspend & resume, these processes are
Hello,
On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 03:45:57PM +0900, Kyungmin Park wrote:
> From: Kyungmin Park
>
> Some platform uses freezer cgroup for speicial purpose to schedule out some
> applications. but after suspend & resume, these processes are thawed and
> running.
They shouldn't be able to leave th
From: Kyungmin Park
Some platform uses freezer cgroup for speicial purpose to schedule out some
applications. but after suspend & resume, these processes are thawed and
running.
but it's inteneded and don't need to thaw it.
To avoid it, does it possible to modify resume code and don't thaw i
11 matches
Mail list logo
