Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S966595AbWKTW0d (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Nov 2006 17:26:33 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S966871AbWKTW0d (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Nov 2006 17:26:33 -0500 Received: from nigel.suspend2.net ([203.171.70.205]:57282 "EHLO nigel.suspend2.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S966595AbWKTW0c (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Nov 2006 17:26:32 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm 0/2] Use freezeable workqueues to avoid suspend-related XFS corruptions From: Nigel Cunningham Reply-To: nigel@suspend2.net To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: David Chinner , Andrew Morton , LKML , Pavel Machek In-Reply-To: <200611202318.29207.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <200611160912.51226.rjw@sisk.pl> <200611202140.47322.rjw@sisk.pl> <1164060206.14889.13.camel@nigel.suspend2.net> <200611202318.29207.rjw@sisk.pl> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 09:26:26 +1100 Message-Id: <1164061586.15714.1.camel@nigel.suspend2.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1329 Lines: 34 Hi. On Mon, 2006-11-20 at 23:18 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > I think I/O can only be submitted from the process context. Thus if we freeze > all (and I mean _all_) threads that are used by filesystems, including worker > threads, we should effectively prevent fs-related I/O from being submitted > after tasks have been frozen. I know that will work. It's what I used to do before the switch to bdev freezing. I guess I need to look again at why I made the switch. Perhaps it was just because you guys gave freezing kthreads a bad wrap as too invasive or something. Bdev freezing is certainly fewer lines of code. > This can be done with the help of create_freezeable_workqueue() introduced in > this patch and I'd like to implement it (and there are only a few filesystems > that use work queues). > > The freezing of bdevs might be a good solution if: > (1) we were sure it wouldn't interact with dm in a wrong way, > (2) _all_ of the filesystems implemented it. > For now, neither (1) nor (2) are satisfied and we need to know we're safe > _now_. Yeah. Regards, Nigel - 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/