Hello, (cc'ing Rafael and Jens) On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 09:41:34AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote: > My question to all of you: Should system_nrt_wq be made freezable, or > should I create a new workqueue that is both freezable and > non-reentrant? And if I do, which of the usages above should be > converted to the new workqueue? Let's make it explicit that the wq is freezable. I'm a bit uncomfortable with the way it's headed. What we should be doing is implementing plugging of request queue for all regular requests while suspend is in progress and then annotate the ones which should go through. We're trying to do it the other way around. Also, in general, I don't think using freezing widely for kernel threads / wqs is a good idea. Plugging device access at subsystem layer should cover most cases and we have notifiers to implement such support and to handle special cases. There are even code paths which try to determine whether system went through PM operation by looking at whether %current went through the freezer. IMHO, we'll be better off with removing freezer support for kthreads. :( Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
