[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
[dm-devel] Re: [PATCH 3/3] Add timeout feature
- From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos szeredi hu>
- To: arjan infradead org
- Cc: axboe kernel dk, t-sato yk jp nec com, tytso mit edu, mtk manpages googlemail com, miklos szeredi hu, linux-kernel vger kernel org, dm-devel redhat com, xfs oss sgi com, hch infradead org, pavel suse cz, viro ZenIV linux org uk, linux-fsdevel vger kernel org, akpm linux-foundation org, linux-ext4 vger kernel org
- Subject: [dm-devel] Re: [PATCH 3/3] Add timeout feature
- Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2008 09:08:07 +0200
On Tue, 8 Jul 2008, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> I tihnk the idea there is
>
> freeze . do the snapshot op . unfreeze . make backup of snapshot
Ah, so then my proposal would become
run_frozen mountpoint do-snapshot
do-backup
release-snapshot
and if they are afraid of deadlocks they can just implement the
timeout in userspace:
run_frozen -t timeout mountpoint do-snapshot
'run_frozen' can be a trivial 30 line app, that can be guaranteed not
to deadlock.
> one can argue about the need of doing the first 3 steps via a userland
> loop; it sure sounds like one needs to be really careful to not do any
> writes to the fs from the app that does snapshots (and that includes
> doing any syscalls in the kernel that allocate memory.. just because
> that already could cause unrelated data to be written from inside the
> app. Not fun.)
Userland always has to be careful when messing with raw devices. That
alone is not a reason to put the snapshotting facility in kernel IMO.
Miklos
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]