Re: [update 2] Re: [RFC][PATCH] PM: Avoid losing wakeup events duringsuspend
From: Alan Stern
Date: Fri Jun 25 2010 - 16:58:22 EST
On Fri, 25 Jun 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > You seem to be referring to the PM workqueue specifically. Perhaps it would be
> > > better to special-case it and stop it by adding a barrier work during suspend
> > > instead of just freezing? Then, it wouldn't need to be singlethread any more.
> > The barrier work would have to be queued to each CPU's thread. That
> > would be okay.
> I guess we should stop the PM workqueue after the freezing of tasks, shouldn't we?
Yes. The exact spot probably doesn't matter; that's as good as any.
> > Hmm, it looks like wait_event_freezable() and
> > wait_event_freezable_timeout() could use similar changes: If the
> > condition is true then they shouldn't try to freeze the caller.
> Yes, but that should be a separate patch IMHO.
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/