Re: [PATCH] Revert "exec: make de_thread() freezable (was: Re: Linux 4.20-rc4)

[Pavel Machek]

On Mon 2018-12-03 14:53:51, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 03-12-18 14:10:06, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Mon 2018-12-03 13:38:57, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Mon 03-12-18 13:31:49, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > > On 12/03, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Now, I wouldn't mind to revert this because the code is really old and
> > > > > we haven't seen many bug reports about failing suspend yet. But what is
> > > > > the actual plan to make this work properly?
> > > > 
> > > > I don't see a simple solution...
> > > > 
> > > > But we need to fix exec/de_thread anyway, then we can probably reconsider
> > > > this patch.
> > > 
> > > My concern is that de_thread fix might be too disruptive for stable
> > > kernels while we might want to have a simple enough fix for the the
> > > suspend issue in the meantime. That was actually the primary reason I've
> > > acked the hack even though I didn't like it.
> > 
> > Do we care about failing sleep in stable? Does someone hit the issue there?
> > 
> > This sounds like issue only Android is hitting, and they run very
> > heavily patched kernels, far away from mainline or stable.
> 
> But the underlying issue is the same and independent on their patches
> AFAIU. And is this really a common problem to care about in stable? I
> dunno to be honest but it sounds annoying for sure. Failing suspend is
> something that doesn't make your day when you are in hurry and want
> find out only later when your laptop heats up your bag ;)

In general, yes. In practice, if it happens 1 in 1000000 suspends, you
don't care that much (but Android cares).

Do we actually have reports of this happening for people outside
Android?

									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature