Re: [Patch] Per kthread freezer flags

[Nigel Cunningham]

Hi.

On Fri, 2004-07-30 at 08:44, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > > > -	pd->cdrw.thread = kthread_run(kcdrwd, pd, "%s", pd->name);
> > > > +	pd->cdrw.thread = kthread_run(kcdrwd, pd, "%s", 0, pd->name);
> > > >  	if (IS_ERR(pd->cdrw.thread)) {
> > > >  		printk("pktcdvd: can't start kernel thread\n");
> > > >  		ret = -ENOMEM;
> > > 
> > > What if someone does swapon /dev/pktdvd0?
> > 
> > Sorry. That's my ignorance. I thought the packet writer was only for
> > writing :>
> 
> Well, swapon /dev/pktdvd would be *very* bad idea as optical drives
> are very slow, but PF_NOFREEZE is more correct here.

Okay. I'll do a new patch for Andrew for this and the following
corrections.

[...]

> > > 
> > > I guess softinterrupts may be neccessary for suspend... Random drivers may use
> > > them, right?
> > 
> > I made this change at least a month ago and no one using suspend2 has
> > had any problems since, so perhaps not. Then again, with the voluntary
> > preemption (from what I've seen of comments about it) this would be a
> > definite yes.
> 
> Ok.

Just in case I wasn't clear, by 'a definite yes', I mean you're
absolutely right - it should be NOFREEZE.

Regards,

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/