From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [PATCH] thermal: Use freezable workqueue Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 10:20:25 +0100 Message-ID: <201102081020.25646.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <201102080029.57195.rjw@sisk.pl> <20110208044712.GA906@core.coreip.homeip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ogre.sisk.pl ([217.79.144.158]:52659 "EHLO ogre.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751253Ab1BHJUk (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Feb 2011 04:20:40 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20110208044712.GA906@core.coreip.homeip.net> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Dmitry Torokhov Cc: Len Brown , ACPI Devel Mailing List , LKML , Linux PM mailing list , Tejun Heo On Tuesday, February 08, 2011, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 12:29:57AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > > > > If thermal polling is enabled, which for example is the case for > > ACPI thermal zones with the _TZP object defined, the thermal driver > > uses delayed work items for this purpose. Unfortunately, since > > they are queued up using schedule_delayed_work(), the work function > > may be executed during system suspend or resume, which is not > > desirable. > > > > To prevent that from happening, use a freezable workqueue for > > queuing up delayed work items in the thermal driver. > > > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki > > --- > > drivers/thermal/thermal_sys.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++-- > > 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > Index: linux-2.6/drivers/thermal/thermal_sys.c > > =================================================================== > > --- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/thermal/thermal_sys.c > > +++ linux-2.6/drivers/thermal/thermal_sys.c > > @@ -62,6 +62,20 @@ static DEFINE_MUTEX(thermal_list_lock); > > > > static unsigned int thermal_event_seqnum; > > > > +static struct workqueue_struct *thermal_wq; > > + > > +static int __init thermal_start_workqueue(void) > > +{ > > + thermal_wq = alloc_workqueue("thermal", WQ_FREEZEABLE, 0); > > Should probably be unbound as well. Yup, thanks. > FWIW, I would not mind if we had a global freezeable workqueue already > predefined. I could switch input_polldev and vmw_balloon to it and there > probably could be more users... Hmm, OK. Do you think we should add system_freezeable_wq to the set of predefined workqueues? Rafael