On Friday, 13. February 2009, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 05:46:42PM +0100, Uli Luckas wrote: > > That's racy. By the time the daemon notices that a process crashed, the > > kernel might already have triggered suspend. userspace might then be > > frozen before it can accuire the 'process restarting' lock. > > I also wonder, if it is immanently racy to use userspcae communication > > (client/daemon) for suspend locks. What if the daemon is already frozen > > when a client sends a lock request request? > > The daemon holds the lock in the first place. When did the daemon take the lock? When it anticipated the process would crash? > There's no race. As for issues with the freezer, I think my position on that > is fairly well known... Not to me. Uli -- ------- ROAD ...the handyPC Company - - - ) ) ) Uli Luckas Head of Software Development ROAD GmbH Bennigsenstr. 14 | 12159 Berlin | Germany fon: +49 (30) 230069 - 62 | fax: +49 (30) 230069 - 69 url: www.road.de Amtsgericht Charlottenburg: HRB 96688 B Managing director: Hans-Peter Constien _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
