From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753736Ab1KFRKY (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Nov 2011 12:10:24 -0500 Received: from e28smtp08.in.ibm.com ([122.248.162.8]:44137 "EHLO e28smtp08.in.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753371Ab1KFRKW (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Nov 2011 12:10:22 -0500 Message-ID: <4EB6BF72.3070509@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2011 22:40:10 +0530 From: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:7.0) Gecko/20110927 Thunderbird/7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tejun Heo CC: rjw@sisk.pl, paul@paulmenage.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de, oleg@redhat.com, matthltc@us.ibm.com, Paul Menage Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/17] freezer: rename thaw_process() to __thaw_task() and simplify the implementation References: <1320087928-32307-1-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <1320087928-32307-6-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org> <4EB677CB.20608@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20111106165112.GB13699@google.com> In-Reply-To: <20111106165112.GB13699@google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit x-cbid: 11110617-2000-0000-0000-000000FE0896 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/06/2011 10:21 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 05:34:27PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: >> On 11/01/2011 12:35 AM, Tejun Heo wrote: >>> * task_lock() is needed to prevent the race with refrigerator() which may >> ^^^^^^ >> __refrigerator()? > > I don't think this really matters. Maybe just drop () from the > comment? Sure, that would do. It was rather trivial anyway... > >> Rebasing to latest kernel, we need to do the conversion in mm/oom_kill.c as well, >> (and consequently add __thaw_task() empty function under !CONFIG_FREEZER, in >> include/linux/freezer.h) > > Yes, for merging, we should do that, but for longer term, as we can > modify freezing condition with relative ease now, I think we should > make tasks being killed ignore freezer instead of relying on > explicitly calling __thaw_task() which is inherently racy. > OK.. And yes, many thanks for your efforts to stabilize the freezer subsystem :) Thanks, Srivatsa S. Bhat