lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Feb]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: Getting rid of freezer for suspend [was Re: [fuse-devel] [PATCH] fuse: make fuse daemon frozen along with kernel threads]
Date
On Thursday, February 14, 2013 02:09:50 PM Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 1:11 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> > On Thursday, February 14, 2013 11:41:16 AM Miklos Szeredi wrote:
>
> >>
> >> It is essentially the same mechanism that is used to delay the
> >> freezing of kernel threads after userspace tasks have been frozen.
> >> Except it's a lot more difficult to determine which userspace tasks
> >> need to be suspended late and which aren't.
> >
> > Well, I suppose that information is available to user space.
> >
> > Do we need an interface for a process to mark itself as PF_FREEZE_LATE or
> > do we need an interface for one process to mark another process as
> > PF_FREEZE_LATE, or both?
>
> As a first step marking self with PF_FREEZE_LATE and inheriting this
> flag across fork/clone would work for most cases, I think.

OK, so we can just have a switch for that in /proc I suppose.

> Marking an unrelated process would have all sorts of issues: Who has
> permission to do this? Won't it be misused to "fix" random freezer
> issues.

Yes, that's why I was asking.

Thanks,
Rafael


--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-02-14 19:01    [W:1.254 / U:0.348 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site