Re: [linux-pm] Freezer: Don't count threads waiting forfrozen filesystems.

[Nigel Cunningham]

Hi Miklos.

On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 00:45 +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Oct 2008, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > Hi.
> > 
> > On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 00:24 +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > > On Wed, 29 Oct 2008, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > > > Remember, though, that we're only freezing fuse at the moment, and
> > > > strictly one filesystem at a time. We can thus happily wait for the
> > > > i_mutex taken by some other process to be released.
> > > 
> > > Not going to work: you need to wait for all requests to be finished,
> > > but those might depend on some other fuse filesystem which has already
> > > been frozen.
> > 
> > Okay. In that case, am I right in thinking that the request waiting on
> > the frozen filesystem will be stuck in request_wait_answer,
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > and the
> > userspace process that was trying to satisfy the request will be stuck
> > in the FUSE_MIGHT_FREEZE call that was invoked for the frozen
> > filesystem?
> 
> No, it already passed that, before the filesystem got frozen.  But it
> doesn't matter, in either case i_mutex will already have been taken by
> the VFS and it won't be released until the request completely
> finishes.

I think we're making different assumptions. I'm assuming that one of
those solutions we already discussed is implemented, such that we don't
start freezing a new filesystem until all the requests for the current
filesystem are dealt with. Perhaps I should come up with a new version
of the patch that implements that.

Nigel

--
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/