Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757065AbXEIMRZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 May 2007 08:17:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753072AbXEIMRS (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 May 2007 08:17:18 -0400 Received: from e35.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.153]:48288 "EHLO e35.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752992AbXEIMRR (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 May 2007 08:17:17 -0400 Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 17:46:41 +0530 From: Gautham R Shenoy To: Stefan Richter Cc: Pavel Machek , 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, 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: <20070509121641.GA27109@in.ibm.com> Reply-To: ego@in.ibm.com References: <200705090934.l499YTvX019783@shell0.pdx.osdl.net> <4641A5F1.5080901@s5r6.in-berlin.de> <20070509104949.GA8164@elf.ucw.cz> <4641B92D.1030909@s5r6.in-berlin.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4641B92D.1030909@s5r6.in-berlin.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.12-2006-07-14 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1759 Lines: 45 Hi Stefan, On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 02:06:05PM +0200, Stefan Richter wrote: > Pavel Machek wrote: > >> > 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). > [...] > >> 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. > > So does freezer_exempt() still do what its name says, or does it > freezer_exempt_but_not_always() now? freezer_exempt() as of now does what its name says. I.e, exempt the thread from all kinds of freeze chills. But with more subsystems using the process freezer, the exemption needs to be event specific. There may be threads which should not be frozen for say kprobes, should be frozen for cpu-hotplug. This selective freezing is not yet available. But it will be soon... > -- > Stefan Richter > -=====-=-=== -=-= -=--= > http://arcgraph.de/sr/ Regards gautham. -- Gautham R Shenoy Linux Technology Center IBM India. "Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain, because Freedom is priceless!" - 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/