Re: Attempted summary of suspend-blockers LKML thread

[Arjan van de Ven]

On Mon, 2 Aug 2010 21:56:10 -0700
Arve HjÃnnevÃg <arve@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > non-obvious dependencies.
> >
> 
> The dependencies is what made this solution uninteresting to us. For
> instance, we currently use cgroup scheduling to reduce the impact of
> some background tasks, but we occasionally saw a watchdog restart of
> the system process were critical services were waiting on a kernel
> mutex owned by a background task for more than 20 seconds. If we froze
> a cgroup instead, we would not hit this particular problem since tasks
> cannot be frozen while executing kernel code the same way they can be
> preempted, but nothing prevents a task from being frozen while holding
> a user-space resource.
> 


one of the solutions we're looking at to solve this is to unfreeze the
cgroup on a regular basis (say, every 15 to 30 seconds) briefly to avoid
this kind of deadlock...



-- 
Arjan van de Ven 	Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/