[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
[dm-devel] Re: [PATCH 2.6.19 5/5] fs: freeze_bdev with semaphore not mutex
- From: Pavel Machek <pavel ucw cz>
- To: Alan Cox <alan lxorguk ukuu org uk>
- Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm osdl org>, Eric Sandeen <sandeen redhat com>, Nigel Cunningham <nigel suspend2 net>, David Chinner <dgc sgi com>, linux-kernel vger kernel org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw sisk pl>, dm-devel redhat com, Srinivasa DS <srinivasa in ibm com>, Alasdair G Kergon <agk redhat com>
- Subject: [dm-devel] Re: [PATCH 2.6.19 5/5] fs: freeze_bdev with semaphore not mutex
- Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 11:36:50 +0100
HI!
> > Why not simply &~ PF_NOFREEZE on that particular process? Filesystems
> > are free to use threads/work queues/whatever, but refrigerator should
> > mean "no writes to filesystem" for them...
>
> You can't go around altering the flags of another process - what locking
> are you relying upon for this ?
Well, my idea was for process to &~ PF_NOFREEZE on itself.
We are currently (kernel/power/process.c) using &p->sighand->siglock
for some accesses, and no locking for others. There were some attempts
to fix this, but they led to problems, and we are not hitting any
problems... part of reason is that we hot-unplug non-boot cpus before
freezing processes, so we are running UP at that point.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]