Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 25 Oct 2018 16:07:51 -0400 | From | Sasha Levin <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 4.4 08/65] btrfs: cleaner_kthread() doesn't need explicit freeze |
| |
On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 05:07:29PM +0200, David Sterba wrote: >On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 10:16:08AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: >> From: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz> >> >> [ Upstream commit 838fe1887765f4cc679febea60d87d2a06bd300e ] >> >> cleaner_kthread() is not marked freezable, and therefore calling >> try_to_freeze() in its context is a pointless no-op. >> >> In addition to that, as has been clearly demonstrated by 80ad623edd2d >> ("Revert "btrfs: clear PF_NOFREEZE in cleaner_kthread()"), it's perfectly >> valid / legal for cleaner_kthread() to stay scheduled out in an arbitrary >> place during suspend (in that particular example that was waiting for >> reading of extent pages), so there is no need to leave any traces of >> freezer in this kthread. >> >> Fixes: 80ad623edd2d ("Revert "btrfs: clear PF_NOFREEZE in cleaner_kthread()") >> Fixes: 696249132158 ("btrfs: clear PF_NOFREEZE in cleaner_kthread()") >> Signed-off-by: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz> >> Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com> >> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org> > >IIRC it was some preparatory work for livepatching. I did a quick check >if this is safe for 4.4 and would say yes, but the patch does not fix >anything so IMO this does not need to go to stable.
Doesn't that also affect hibernation and such?
-- Thanks, Sasha
| |