Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757651AbXEIKuR (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 May 2007 06:50:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755321AbXEIKuE (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 May 2007 06:50:04 -0400 Received: from gprs189-60.eurotel.cz ([160.218.189.60]:38029 "EHLO amd.ucw.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755251AbXEIKuB (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 May 2007 06:50:01 -0400 Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 12:49:49 +0200 From: Pavel Machek To: Stefan Richter Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, rjw@sisk.pl, James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com, aneesh.kumar@gmail.com, drzeus@drzeus.cx, dwmw2@infradead.org, ego@in.ibm.com, greg@kroah.com, mingo@elte.hu, neilb@suse.de, oleg@tv-sign.ru, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, vatsa@in.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch 128/197] freezer: add try_to_freeze calls to all kernel threads Message-ID: <20070509104949.GA8164@elf.ucw.cz> References: <200705090934.l499YTvX019783@shell0.pdx.osdl.net> <4641A5F1.5080901@s5r6.in-berlin.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4641A5F1.5080901@s5r6.in-berlin.de> X-Warning: Reading this can be dangerous to your mental health. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060126 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1584 Lines: 36 Hi! > > Add try_to_freeze() calls to the remaining kernel threads that do not call > > try_to_freeze() already, although they set PF_NOFREEZE. > > > > In the future we are going to replace PF_NOFREEZE with a set of flags that > > will be set to indicate in which situations the task should not be frozen (for > > example, there can be a task that should be frozen for the CPU hotplugging and > > should not be frozen for the system suspend). For this reason every kernel > > thread should be able to freeze itself (ie. call try_to_freeze()), so that it > > can be frozen whenever necessary. > > A few questions: > > Does try_to_freeze()'s kerneldoc document that try_to_freeze() is a > no-op sometimes but should nevertheless be called for this and that > reason? (I don't know the entire patch series.) > > Why add no-op-try_to_freeze() everywhere now, instead of adding it later > when it will actually be needed? (I.e. "in the future".) It is needed later in the patch series... for kprobes, etc. > Can we please have a future where no device driver has to care if and > when and how to freeze its threads? No. Freezing is useful for kprobes/cpu hotplug as well as suspend. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html - 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/