From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932562AbXBNUWc (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Feb 2007 15:22:32 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932563AbXBNUWc (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Feb 2007 15:22:32 -0500 Received: from mail.screens.ru ([213.234.233.54]:54470 "EHLO mail.screens.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932562AbXBNUWb (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Feb 2007 15:22:31 -0500 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 23:22:09 +0300 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Gautham R Shenoy Cc: akpm@osdl.org, paulmck@us.ibm.com, mingo@elte.hu, vatsa@in.ibm.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com, venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rjw@sisk.pl Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH(Experimental) 1/4] freezer-cpu-hotplug core Message-ID: <20070214202209.GC301@tv-sign.ru> References: <20070214144031.GA15257@in.ibm.com> <20070214144229.GA19789@in.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070214144229.GA19789@in.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 02/14, Gautham R Shenoy wrote: > > o Splits CPU_DEAD into two events namely > - CPU_DEAD: which will be handled while the processes are still > frozen. > > - CPU_DEAD_KILL_THREADS: To be handled after we thaw_processes. Imho, this is not right. This change the meaning of CPU_DEAD, and so we should fix all users of CPU_DEAD as well. How about CPU_DEAD_WHATEVER the processes are still frozen CPU_DEAD after we thaw_processes This way we can add processing of the new CPU_DEAD_WHATEVER event where it may help. We don't need to change (for example) workqueue.c with this patch, we can do it in a separate patch. CPU_UP_PREPARE is called after freeze_processes()... Probably this works, but imho this is no good. Suppose for a moment that khelper will be frozen (yes, yes it can't be), then we can't do kthread_create(). Oleg.