From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jan Kara Subject: Re: [RFC] fsfreeze: moving from uniterruptible to killable Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 15:34:47 +0100 Message-ID: <20130327143447.GB1771@quack.suse.cz> References: <514EC323.7050002@gmail.com> <20130326211520.GF2082@quack.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jan Kara , Linux FS Devel , Linux Kernel To: Marco Stornelli Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Wed 27-03-13 12:39:10, Marco Stornelli wrote: > 2013/3/26 Jan Kara : > > On Sun 24-03-13 10:10:59, Marco Stornelli wrote: > >> When a fs is frozen, a process can hang because we wait in > >> uniterruptible state. We give the user the possibility to kill the process. > > Yes, but it needs slightly more work as you probably know... (bailing out > > properly when the signal arrives). > > > > Honza > > > > Of course, indeed, it was only an RFC to start a discussion, not a > patch :) The point was: is this kind of change a behaviour that can > break user-space in some way? IMHO no, but I'd like to have a > discussion about that before to start coding. What do you think? Killable wait is almost always safe WRT to userspace breakage. In this case I cannot see how it could matter. That's why I agree it's a good thing to do. Honza -- Jan Kara SUSE Labs, CR