Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758813AbYAAXyl (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Jan 2008 18:54:41 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758118AbYAAXyX (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Jan 2008 18:54:23 -0500 Received: from home.nigel.suspend2.net ([203.171.70.205]:52137 "EHLO server1.example.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758069AbYAAXyV (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Jan 2008 18:54:21 -0500 Message-ID: <477AD2AA.4070707@nigel.suspend2.net> Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 10:54:18 +1100 From: Nigel Cunningham Reply-To: nigel@nigel.suspend2.net User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" CC: suspend2-devel@lists.tuxonice.net, "The place to get help!" , LKML , pm list Subject: Freezing filesystems (Was Re: What's in store for 2008 for TuxOnIce?) References: <477AC060.5040004@nigel.suspend2.net> <200801020021.37259.rjw@sisk.pl> In-Reply-To: <200801020021.37259.rjw@sisk.pl> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 4287 Lines: 103 Hi. Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Tuesday, 1 of January 2008, Nigel Cunningham wrote: >> Hi all. > > Hi Nigel, Gidday :) >> With the start of a new year, I suppose it's a good time to think about >> what I'd like to do with TuxOnIce this year and see what feedback I get. >> >> First up, I'm thinking about closing the mailing lists and asking people >> to use LKML instead for reporting issues and so on. I'm thinking about >> this because it will help with allowing people who work on mainline to >> see how stable (or otherwise!) TuxOnIce is now. It should also help when >> (as often happens) bug reports aren't actually issues with the patch, >> but with vanilla (ie drivers). > > I would also like the TuxOnIce issues related to drivers, ACPI, etc. to go to > one of the kernel-related lists, but I think linux-pm may be better for that > due to the much lower traffic. I guess that makes sense. I guess people can always be referred to LKML for the issues where the appropriate person isn't on linux-pm. >> Perhaps it will also help with whatever effort I find time to make towards >> convincing Andrew that it really does have significant advantages over >> [u]swsusp and kexec based hibernation. >> >> Secondly, I'm planning on moving the website soonish. It's taken longer >> than I planned because it will be sharing with another server I'm >> maintaining, and it has taken longer than expected to find good hosting >> for the other server (which was done first). Now that I'm happy with the >> other server's state, I'm hoping to start shifting >> suspend2.net/tuxonice.net soon. >> >> For those who might be looking for hosting themselves, I'm using >> slicehost. I initially tried GoDaddy, but had terrible service, problems >> with draconian limits on the volume of outgoing email (1000/day by >> default - useless if you're doing mailing lists) and unexpected, >> unexplained delays in mail delivery through the SMTP delay they force >> you to use. Slicehost, on the other hand, are terrific to deal with in >> everyway. If you sign up with them because of this email, please >> consider putting my email (nigel at suspend2.net) as the referrer - I >> then get a discount on the cost of the hosting. >> >> Third, regarding the patch itself, I'm taking my time in working towards >> the 3.0 release. We don't have any major bugs with 3.0-rc3 reported, but >> I have some things I want to complete before the final release: >> * see it well tested; >> * get a finished initial version of the cluster support; >> * finish completing support for the new resume-from-other kernels >> functionality that Rafael has added in 2.6.24. (We can resume from the >> same kernel at the moment, but I need to convince myself that nosave >> data is properly handled). > > Have you finished the support for freezing filesystems before freezing tasks > that we talked about some time ago? Hmm. I've had too many things going through my little brain since then. What I currently have is support for freezing fuse filesystems separately. It looks like: int freeze_processes(void) { int error; printk("Stopping fuse filesystems.\n"); freeze_filesystems(FS_FREEZER_FUSE); freezer_state = FREEZER_FILESYSTEMS_FROZEN; printk("Freezing user space processes ... "); error = try_to_freeze_tasks(FREEZER_USER_SPACE); if (error) goto Exit; printk("done.\n"); sys_sync(); printk("Stopping normal filesystems.\n"); freeze_filesystems(FS_FREEZER_NORMAL); freezer_state = FREEZER_USERSPACE_FROZEN; printk("Freezing remaining freezable tasks ... "); error = try_to_freeze_tasks(FREEZER_KERNEL_THREADS); if (error) goto Exit; printk("done."); freezer_state = FREEZER_FULLY_ON; Exit: BUG_ON(in_atomic()); printk("\n"); return error; } (I'm not yet worrying about ext3 on fuse or such like, but it shouldn't be hard to extend the model to do that). 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/