[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
[dm-devel] Re: [PATCH 3/3] Add timeout feature
- From: Pavel Machek <pavel suse cz>
- To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos szeredi hu>
- Cc: axboe kernel dk, t-sato yk jp nec com, tytso mit edu, mtk manpages googlemail com, linux-kernel vger kernel org, xfs oss sgi com, hch infradead org, dm-devel redhat com, viro ZenIV linux org uk, linux-fsdevel vger kernel org, akpm linux-foundation org, linux-ext4 vger kernel org, arjan infradead org
- Subject: [dm-devel] Re: [PATCH 3/3] Add timeout feature
- Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 22:48:30 +0200
On Wed 2008-07-09 09:08:07, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> 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.
Userland apps can be swapped out and need kernel memory allocations
during syscalls.
I bet even sleep(30) uses kmalloc internally.
So yes, even trivial applications can deadlock.
--
(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]