Re: [Patch] Per kthread freezer flags

[Nigel Cunningham <ncunningham@linuxmail.org>]

Hi.

On Thu, 2004-07-29 at 07:20, Andrew Morton wrote:
> hm.  In some ways I'd prefer to see new
> create_singlethread_workqueue_freezer(char *) or whatever, rather than
> adding an extra argument.  That's neater, smaller code and
> forward-compatible.
> 
> But then again, the advantage of breaking the build for unconverted code is
> that it makes people think about what their threads should be doing, so
> let's go your way.
> 
> The one concern I'd have is that $RANDOM_KERNEL_DEVELOPER probably doesn't
> have a clue whether or not his kernel thread should be setting PF_NOFREEZE.
> What are the guidelines here?

If a process might be/is needed to get the image to the storage device,
it should be NOFREEZE. (Thus, USB threads might be NOFREEZE to allow for
USB storage, likewise for SCSI). When I get an NFS writer done, the
threads for network cards could probably be made NOFREEZE too. Things
like kjournald don't need to run during suspend (even if we're writing
to a swapfile in an ext3 partition), so can be 0 for now (SYNCTHREAD
later).

> wrt your "Add missing refrigerator support" patch: I'll suck that up, but
> be aware that there's a big i2o patch in -mm which basically rips out the
> driver which you just fixed up.  Perhaps you can send Markus Lidel
> <Markus.Lidel@shadowconnect.com> and I a fix for that version of the driver
> sometime?

I've just started following your mm patches, and will do updates for
last nights release shortly.

Regards,

Nigel