From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from e28smtp05.in.ibm.com ([122.248.162.5]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.76 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1RXcY5-0003nr-16 for kexec@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 05 Dec 2011 17:41:54 +0000 Received: from /spool/local by e28smtp05.in.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 23:11:50 +0530 Received: from d28av03.in.ibm.com (d28av03.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.65]) by d28relay01.in.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id pB5HfhNP4481046 for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 23:11:43 +0530 Received: from d28av03.in.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d28av03.in.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id pB5HfgdR024091 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2011 04:41:43 +1100 Message-ID: <4EDD0254.10408@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 23:11:40 +0530 From: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] PM / Sleep: Make [un]lock_system_sleep() generic References: <20111204200208.25620.515.stgit@srivatsabhat.in.ibm.com> <20111205171443.GB627@google.com> <4EDCFE9F.9050605@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20111205173057.GE627@google.com> In-Reply-To: <20111205173057.GE627@google.com> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: kexec-bounces@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: kexec-bounces+dwmw2=infradead.org@lists.infradead.org To: Tejun Heo Cc: len.brown@intel.com, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Oleg Nesterov , rjw@sisk.pl, rdunlap@xenotime.net, ebiederm@xmission.com, pavel@ucw.cz On 12/05/2011 11:00 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: > (cc'ing Oleg) > > On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 10:55:51PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: >> I wanted these APIs to be generic, not restricted to work only for userspace >> processes. Both freezer_do_not_count() and freezer_count() are effective only >> when current->mm is non-NULL (ie., only for userspace ones). >> I think I have documented this in the patch which added these things to the >> 2 APIs. See commit 6a76b7a in linux-pm/linux-next. > > I see. Oleg was curious about the ->mm condition too and IIRC there's > no reason for that restriction. Maybe removing that in another patch > and using the count functions is better? > Oh well, then yes, that sounds like a better idea. Will send patches for that. Thank you. Regards, Srivatsa S. Bhat _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec