Hi, On Thursday, 7 of April 2005 16:43, Alan Stern wrote: > On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > > Whenever this topic comes up, the discussion is always abstract. If > > someone could think of a lock that might actually deadlock suspending, > > we look seriously at the issue. In the meantime, all I can say, from > > roughly three years of developing and testing, is that it never seems to > > happen. And yes, I know that doesn't necessarily mean it can't. > > I agree with Nigel. Certainly in the USB part of the kernel the > uninterruptible sleeps all have rather short, bounded durations. > Furthermore they correspond to specific events -- a new device is plugged > in -- which are unlikely to occur just as the system is going to sleep. Strangely enough, I agree with him too. :-) Still, Nigel says he is handling uninterruptible tasks in the way that I was thinking of (as far as I understand it), which you say is a mistake ... Greets, Rafael -- - Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here? - That depends a good deal on where you want to get to. -- Lewis Carroll "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland"
