lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Sep]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Fix failure to resume from initrds.
Date
On Tuesday, 11 September 2007 13:55, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, 11 September 2007 13:27, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > On Tuesday 11 September 2007 21:04:22 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, 11 September 2007 05:54, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > > > Hi all.
> > > >
> > > > Commit 831441862956fffa17b9801db37e6ea1650b0f69 (Freezer: make kernel
> > threads
> > > > nonfreezable by default) breaks freezing when attempting to resume from an
> > > > initrd, because the init (which is freezeable) spins while waiting for
> > another
> > > > thread to run /linuxrc, but doesn't check whether it has been told to
> > enter
> > > > the refrigerator.
> > >
> > > Hm.
> > >
> > > I use a resume from an initrd on a regular basis and it works without the
> > patch
> > > below.
> > >
> > > I think we need to investigate what happens in your test case a bit.
> >
> > Ah. That makes me realise that I see that too - my AMD64 uniprocessor laptop
> > didn't need the patch (guess that's why I didn't notice the need and ack'd
> > the patch). But my x86 SMP machine... it needs this. I'll see if they're
> > running on different processors.
>
> Well, strange. My x86_64 SMP machines don't need the patch too.

Anyway, yes, init is freezable, but should it be?

I mean, shouldn't we rather add PF_NOFREEZE to kernel_init()?

Greetings,
Rafael
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-09-11 15:03    [W:0.102 / U:3.612 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site