Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 12 Feb 2015 15:32:45 +0100 (CET) | From | Jiri Kosina <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 6/9] livepatch: create per-task consistency model |
| |
On Thu, 12 Feb 2015, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> And what's wrong with using known good spots like the freezer?
Quoting Tejun from the thread Jiri Slaby likely had on mind:
"The fact that they may coincide often can be useful as a guideline or whatever but I'm completely against just mushing it together when it isn't correct. This kind of things quickly lead to ambiguous situations where people are not sure about the specific semantics or guarantees of the construct and implement weird voodoo code followed by voodoo fixes. We already had a full round of that with the kernel freezer itself, where people thought that the freezer magically makes PM work properly for a subsystem. Let's please not do that again."
The whole thread begins here, in case everything hasn't been covered here yet:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/7/2/328
Thanks again for looking into this,
-- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs
| |