From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8AC1424BCF5 for ; Fri, 8 Aug 2025 07:59:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1754639976; cv=none; b=FxiS0ePEg0n8JmMzmGBliUyTLLeYmb6/WMDKRx8TsmWLwgenQIdx2P5OMGhpCs86SzFwu5pNjYnAbb2R69NMe6hup/JFl2tZ5VKaBdtBfaSPWqce8P+WE5IbSOBX3u9kaqr17Nm4mibU/BXC9uHRWmRahUBcRjAqsCJ8xPmnd1M= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1754639976; c=relaxed/simple; bh=aV0E+W7TpF7ScFUrIhlu67F3pDF1bA8Hd4KFXigqUCs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=q8TilE2zKFzcMwTjAlMTsQcr5J121BOPHWUq+mmA5wb4zbamlyDeUfINKL/rYjHGUaecR++ZSwO8PpCryeSYrNzVneX4dtDGQhbWDf5/HrLEop2M7UFaf6E+mvchxoMEIEbeC4nOvftC/uru/d8oyBRqGUQRm2crqWI6qa4HrWM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=ID4MZMxV; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="ID4MZMxV" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1754639973; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=aV0E+W7TpF7ScFUrIhlu67F3pDF1bA8Hd4KFXigqUCs=; b=ID4MZMxVmStntNbz7jP+tqjTIz7BMN5ZE5EFrmxxmh+ZW8FfAv+wAuKzcEbqYYTmxhbOq5 HLhPOB6YEzOUySY2A4Jz0svhKz5xR0RRxQ5BL8tlYni8QqUvoJQqnVgIDskznKSkhLOS11 THOfhn4Hn8/CSzfIMkMl7HSFmaSNJ2U= Received: from mx-prod-mc-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-35-165-154-97.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.165.154.97]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-682-UNIuuF62OhurBbbx6qeMxQ-1; Fri, 08 Aug 2025 03:59:29 -0400 X-MC-Unique: UNIuuF62OhurBbbx6qeMxQ-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: UNIuuF62OhurBbbx6qeMxQ_1754639965 Received: from mx-prod-int-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.17]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7991C1800446; Fri, 8 Aug 2025 07:59:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dhcp-27-174.brq.redhat.com (unknown [10.45.225.117]) by mx-prod-int-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 24BB41954185; Fri, 8 Aug 2025 07:59:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by dhcp-27-174.brq.redhat.com (nbSMTP-1.00) for uid 1000 oleg@redhat.com; Fri, 8 Aug 2025 09:58:12 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2025 09:57:54 +0200 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Zihuan Zhang Cc: Michal Hocko , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Peter Zijlstra , David Hildenbrand , Jonathan Corbet , Ingo Molnar , Juri Lelli , Vincent Guittot , Dietmar Eggemann , Steven Rostedt , Ben Segall , Mel Gorman , Valentin Schneider , len brown , pavel machek , Kees Cook , Andrew Morton , Lorenzo Stoakes , "Liam R . Howlett" , Vlastimil Babka , Mike Rapoport , Suren Baghdasaryan , Catalin Marinas , Nico Pache , xu xin , wangfushuai , Andrii Nakryiko , Christian Brauner , Thomas Gleixner , Jeff Layton , Al Viro , Adrian Ratiu , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/9] freezer: Introduce freeze priority model to address process dependency issues Message-ID: <20250808075753.GB29612@redhat.com> References: <20250807121418.139765-1-zhangzihuan@kylinos.cn> <4c46250f-eb0f-4e12-8951-89431c195b46@kylinos.cn> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <4c46250f-eb0f-4e12-8951-89431c195b46@kylinos.cn> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.0 on 10.30.177.17 On 08/08, Zihuan Zhang wrote: > > 在 2025/8/7 21:25, Michal Hocko 写道: > >If they are running in the userspace and e.g. sleeping while not > >TASK_FREEZABLE then priority simply makes no difference. And if they are > >TASK_FREEZABLE then the priority doens't matter either. > > > >What am I missing? I too do not understand how can this series improve the freezer. > under ideal conditions, if a userspace task is TASK_FREEZABLE, receives the > freezing() signal, and enters the refrigerator in a timely manner, Note that __freeze_task() won't even send a signal to a sleeping TASK_FREEZABLE task, __freeze_task() will just change its state to TASK_FROZEN. Oleg.