[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [dm-devel] [RFC][PATCH 0/3] dm-raid1: fix deadlock at suspend after suspend was interrupted

Hi Yasui-san,

On 01/21/2010 07:58 AM +0900, Takahiro Yasui wrote:
> Kiyoshi Ueda wrote:
>> On 01/20/2010 05:40 AM +0900, Takahiro Yasui wrote:
>>> Introduce a target handler, cancel_presuspend, to cancel status changes
>>> done by a target specific presuspend handler.
>> How about using ->resume as a cancelling method?
>> Though you have to audit existing targets' ->resume handler,
>> I think it's better idea than adding another target handler
>> just for this purpose.
> I'm afraid that we need to modify each target's resume handler so that
> they work properly even after processing presuspend handler but before
> postsuspend handler.
> Please let me know if there is some oversight.

There is no oversight.
Perhaps I should have said 'audit (and modify if necessary)'.

If auditing and modifying all targets are difficult, I don't object
your approach which adds ->cancel_presuspend.
But ->cancel_presuspend should be a subset of ->resume and it should
make some code duplication.  If ->resume can always restore target state
correctly, it may avoid such duplication.

Althrough I'm not sure the following idea is really reasonable,
I think it should be worth to consider about it:
  When ->postsuspend is called and the device is really suspended,
  DMF_SUSPENDED flag is set in md->flags.
  So targets' ->resume handler can use it to check ->postsuspend
  had been called or not.

Kiyoshi Ueda

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]