Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755452AbYJ3OAk (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:00:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756070AbYJ3N4t (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Oct 2008 09:56:49 -0400 Received: from iolanthe.rowland.org ([192.131.102.54]:56753 "HELO iolanthe.rowland.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1756056AbYJ3N4t (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Oct 2008 09:56:49 -0400 Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 09:56:48 -0400 (EDT) From: Alan Stern X-X-Sender: stern@iolanthe.rowland.org To: Nigel Cunningham cc: Miklos Szeredi , , , Subject: Re: [linux-pm] Freezer: Don't count threads waiting for frozen filesystems. In-Reply-To: <1225371842.8576.6.camel@nigel-laptop> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 875 Lines: 22 On Fri, 31 Oct 2008, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > Well yeah, your patch handles the straightforward cases. But it > > doesn't help with the more tricky cases, where one fuse filesystem is > > using another, and as those may become more widespread, this approach > > will fail. > > At the moment, yes. But it's not impossible for us to modify the patch > to handle that as well. It depends on what you mean. The most direct reading of your statement is simply wrong: It is _theoretically_ impossible to find the correct order for freezing filesystems. To do so would be equivalent to solving the halting problem. Alan Stern -- 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/