Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753367AbZFWReg (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:34:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751905AbZFWRe3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:34:29 -0400 Received: from mta.netezza.com ([12.148.248.132]:59711 "EHLO netezza.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750979AbZFWRe2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:34:28 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] coredump: Retry writes where appropriate From: Paul Smith Reply-To: paul@mad-scientist.net To: Oleg Nesterov , Roland McGrath Cc: Alan Cox , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Andi Kleen In-Reply-To: <20090604171458.F0DC7FC3C3@magilla.sf.frob.com> References: <20090601161234.GA10486@redhat.com> <20090601174159.48acf3f5@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20090601171119.GA13970@redhat.com> <20090601184608.6379440c@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20090601182305.GA16372@redhat.com> <20090601203845.B010DFC3C7@magilla.sf.frob.com> <20090601223241.GA26788@redhat.com> <20090601230210.C0B15FC3C7@magilla.sf.frob.com> <20090602000850.GA31064@redhat.com> <20090603070939.4E31CFC333@magilla.sf.frob.com> <20090604031544.GA23930@redhat.com> <20090604171458.F0DC7FC3C3@magilla.sf.frob.com> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: GNU's Not Unix! Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:31:18 -0400 Message-Id: <1245778278.9022.21.camel@psmith-ubeta.netezza.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.24.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Jun 2009 17:31:19.0467 (UTC) FILETIME=[6B68CFB0:01C9F428] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 973 Lines: 29 On Thu, 2009-06-04 at 10:14 -0700, Roland McGrath wrote: > > Fortunately, this doesn't look hard. Whatever we do, we should modify > > dump_write/seek to check fatal_signal_pending() anyway. Because we can't > > know if f_ops->write() pays attention to signals. > > Yes, that sounds fine. > > > This means we can just add try_to_freeze(). > > Right. > > > As for exit_mm(), we can use freezer_do_not_count() + freezer_count() > > around the "for (;;)" loop. > > Ah yes, sure. Hi Oleg; Did you have any more time to look into this? I'm currently using my patch and it's OK for my purposes but I'll be happy to test any proposal you come up with, if you like, so I can drop my patch in the future. Let me know, thanks! -- 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/