On 07/10, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > > No, we can't do that: > > > > > > > > Imagine we have single uninterruptible task that waits for disk. It > > > > would exit uninterruptible state in 10msec, *but* you give up and > > > > unfreeze all. Now, another task goes uninterruptible waiting for > > > > disk and situation repeats. Livelock. > > > > > > For how many times would that have to repeat before 30s of timeout expires? > > > > > > Sorry, but I don't buy this argument. :-) > > > > > > > Yes, this might play with races in interresting ways and help fuse, > > > > but we do not want the livelock in the first place. > > > > > > I think that the "livelock" will never happen. > > > > > > Besides, we can add another timeout for breaking the loop from a "locked up" > > > state. > > > > Actually I like this idea. :-) > > > > I have updated the patch to use the additional timeout, please have a look > > (below). > > Yes, this one could actually work... _really_ inefficiently. Why inefficiently? I am asking because I am curious (I never used freezer for myself): how long does it take to freeze all tasks? I can't believe we need 20 seconds unless something goes wrong. It looks very natural to do what Rafael suggests. Oleg. _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
