xfs-masters
[Top] [All Lists]

[xfs-masters] Re: freeze vs freezer

To: Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@xxxxxxx>
Subject: [xfs-masters] Re: freeze vs freezer
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 17:02:34 +0100
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@xxxxxxx>, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>, xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <8B00F353-983F-40E7-931B-EA73CCD32F0A@mac.com>
References: <4744FD87.7010301@goop.org> <200711262253.35420.rjw@sisk.pl> <20071127053846.GA28884@srcf.ucam.org> <200711271840.24825.rjw@sisk.pl> <8B00F353-983F-40E7-931B-EA73CCD32F0A@mac.com>
Reply-to: xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: xfs-masters-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
Hi!

> >>>>So how do you handle threads that are blocked on I/O or a lock  
> >>>>during the system freeze process, then?
> >>>
> >>>We wait until they can continue.
> >>
> >>So if I have a process blocked on an unavilable NFS mount, I can't
> >>suspend?
> >
> >That's correct, you can't.
> >
> >[And I know what you're going to say. ;-)]
> 
> Why exactly does suspend/hibernation depend on "TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE"  
> instead of a zero preempt_count()?  Really what we should do is just  
> iterate over all of the actual physical devices and tell each one  
> "Block new IO requests preemptably, finish pending DMA, put the  
> hardware in low-power mode, and prepare for suspend/hibernate".  As  
> long as each driver knows how to do those simple things we can have  
> an entirely consistent kernel image for both suspend and for  
> hibernation.

"each driver" means this is a lot of work. But yes, that is probably
way to go, and patch would be welcome.

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) 
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>