public inbox for linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
To: Nigel Cunningham <nigel@suspend2.net>
Cc: Linux PM <linux-pm@osdl.org>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] swsusp: support creating bigger images
Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 13:20:49 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200605011320.50256.rjw@sisk.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200605011150.04429.nigel@suspend2.net>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3995 bytes --]

[Dropped Nick and LKML from the Cc list.]

Hi,

On Monday 01 May 2006 03:49, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> Hi.
> 
> Sorry for the slow response - I only have internet access at work now.

No problem at all. :-)

> This is  going to be a pattern for the next few weeks - I'm off work next
> week and.the week after I'll also be off apart from Monday and Tuesday
> (those are my last two days working for Cyclades - I then get my sweetheart
> and little one back, and we drive down to Victoria over the rest of the week).
> 
> On Sunday 30 April 2006 22:27, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Wednesday 26 April 2006 02:49, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 26 April 2006 08:43, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday 26 April 2006 00:25, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > > > > It does apply to all of the LRU pages. This is what I've been
> > > > > > > doing for years now. The only corner case I've come across is
> > > > > > > XFS. It still wants to write data even when there's nothing to do
> > > > > > > and it's threads are frozen (IIRC - haven't looked at it for a
> > > > > > > while). I got around that by freezing bdevs when freezing
> > > > > > > processes.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This means if we freeze bdevs, we'll be able to save all of the LRU
> > > > > > pages, except for the pages mapped by the current task, without
> > > > > > copying.  I think we can try to do this, but we'll need a patch to
> > > > > > freeze bdevs for this purpose. ;-)
> > > > >
> > > > > ...adding more dependencies to how vm/blockdevs work. I'd say current
> > > > > code is complex enough...
> > > >
> > > > Well, why don't we see the patch?  If it's too complex, we can just
> > > > decide not to use it. :-)
> > >
> > > In Suspend2, I'm still using a different version of process.c to what you
> > > guys have. In my version, I thaw kernelspace, then thaw bdevs, then thaw
> > > userspace. The version below just thaws bdevs after thawing all
> > > processes. I think that might need modification, but thought I'd post
> > > this now so you can see how complicated or otherwise it is.
> >
> > IMHO it doesn't look so scary. :-)
> 
> :)
> 
> > > diff -ruN linux-2.6.17-rc2/kernel/power/process.c
> > > bdev-freeze/kernel/power/process.c ---
> > > linux-2.6.17-rc2/kernel/power/process.c	2006-04-19 14:27:36.000000000
> > > +1000 +++ bdev-freeze/kernel/power/process.c	2006-04-26
> > > 10:44:56.000000000 +1000 @@ -19,6 +19,56 @@
> > >   */
> > >  #define TIMEOUT	(20 * HZ)
> > >
> > > +struct frozen_fs
> > > +{
> > > +	struct list_head fsb_list;
> > > +	struct super_block *sb;
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +LIST_HEAD(frozen_fs_list);
> > > +
> > > +void freezer_make_fses_rw(void)
> > > +{
> > > +	struct frozen_fs *fs, *next_fs;
> > > +
> > > +	list_for_each_entry_safe(fs, next_fs, &frozen_fs_list, fsb_list) {
> > > +		thaw_bdev(fs->sb->s_bdev, fs->sb);
> > > +
> > > +		list_del(&fs->fsb_list);
> > > +		kfree(fs);
> > > +	}
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +/*
> > > + * Done after userspace is frozen, so there should be no danger of
> > > + * fses being unmounted while we're in here.
> > > + */
> > > +int freezer_make_fses_ro(void)
> > > +{
> > > +	struct frozen_fs *fs;
> > > +	struct super_block *sb;
> > > +
> > > +	/* Generate the list */
> > > +	list_for_each_entry(sb, &super_blocks, s_list) {
> > > +		if (!sb->s_root || !sb->s_bdev ||
> > > +		    (sb->s_frozen == SB_FREEZE_TRANS) ||
> > > +		    (sb->s_flags & MS_RDONLY))
> > > +			continue;
> > > +
> > > +		fs = kmalloc(sizeof(struct frozen_fs), GFP_ATOMIC);
> >
> > Shouldn't we check for kmalloc() failures here?
> 
> Good point. Just because I've never seen it fail, doesn't mean it can't :)
> 
> Before I roll a new version, what did you think splitting the thawing and 
> thawing bdevs in the middle? I think it's the right thing (TM) to do :>

Do you mean to thaw kernel threads first, thaw bdevs next and thaw user
space processes at the end?  I think it should be done in that order if
the bdevs are frozen.

Greetings,
Rafael

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 0 bytes --]



  reply	other threads:[~2006-05-01 11:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-04-24 21:55 [RFC][PATCH] swsusp: support creating bigger images Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-04-24 22:16 ` Pavel Machek
2006-04-25  8:26   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-04-25 10:04     ` Pavel Machek
2006-04-25 10:31       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-04-27 15:27         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-04-27 20:55           ` Pavel Machek
2006-04-28  9:19             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-04-28  9:23               ` Pavel Machek
2006-04-25 10:28 ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-25 15:39   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-04-25 20:32     ` Pavel Machek
2006-04-25 21:12       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-04-25 21:18         ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-04-25 22:21           ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-04-25 22:24             ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-04-25 22:38               ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-04-25 22:25             ` Pavel Machek
2006-04-25 22:30               ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-04-25 22:36                 ` Pavel Machek
2006-04-25 22:43               ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-04-26  0:49                 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-04-30 12:27                   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-05-01  1:49                     ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-05-01 11:20                       ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2006-05-01 22:56                         ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-04-26  2:24             ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-26  3:41               ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-04-26 16:22                 ` Nick Piggin
2006-04-26 21:16                   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2006-04-26  8:10               ` Pavel Machek
2006-04-27 19:53     ` [RFC][PATCH] swsusp: support creating bigger images (rev. 2) Rafael J. Wysocki

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200605011320.50256.rjw@sisk.pl \
    --to=rjw@sisk.pl \
    --cc=linux-pm@osdl.org \
    --cc=nigel@suspend2.net \
    --cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox