From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751189AbWA0EHz (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jan 2006 23:07:55 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751199AbWA0EHz (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jan 2006 23:07:55 -0500 Received: from [202.53.187.9] ([202.53.187.9]:13198 "EHLO cust8446.nsw01.dataco.com.au") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751189AbWA0EHy (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jan 2006 23:07:54 -0500 From: Nigel Cunningham Organization: Suspend2.net To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [ 00/23] [Suspend2] Freezer Upgrade Patches Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 14:04:08 +1000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Pavel Machek References: <20060126034518.3178.55397.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <200601270010.22702.rjw@sisk.pl> In-Reply-To: <200601270010.22702.rjw@sisk.pl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200601271404.08680.nigel@suspend2.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi. On Friday 27 January 2006 09:10, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > Hi, > > On Thursday, 26 January 2006 04:45, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > Hi everyone. > > > > This set of patches represents the freezer upgrade patches from Suspend2. > > > > The key features of this changeset are: > > > > - Use of Christoph Lameter's todo list notifiers, which help with SMP > > cleanness. > > - Splitting the freezing of kernel and userspace processes. Freezing > > currently suffers from a race because userspace processes can be > > submitting work for kernel threads, thereby stopping them from > > responding to freeze messages in a timely manner. The freezer can > > thus give up when it doesn't really need to. (This is not normally > > a problem only because load is not usually high). > > Could you please describe specific situation? The simplest example would be: dd if=/dev/hda of=/dev/null echo disk > /sys/power/state > > - The use of bdev freezing to ensure filesystems are properly frozen, > > thereby increasing the integrity of on-disk data in the case where > > a resume doesn't occur. This is also helpful in the case of Suspend2, > > where we don't atomically copy all memory, instead writing LRU pages > > separately. > > Is this also needed when we do atomically copy all memory? I'm not thawing the bdevs until the end of resuming, so no. Regards, Nigel -- See our web page for Howtos, FAQs, the Wiki and mailing list info. http://www.suspend2.net IRC: #suspend2 on Freenode