Re: [RFC][PATCH -mm 5/6] Freezer: Use freezing timeout more efficiently

["Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>]

On Tuesday, 10 July 2007 01:34, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
> > 
> > The freezer fails if there are uninterruptible tasks waiting for some frozen
> > tasks to let them continue.  Moreover, in that case try_to_freeze_tasks() loops
> > uselessly until the timeout expires which is wasteful, so in principle we should
> > make the freezer fail as soon as all the tasks that refuse to freeze are
> > uninterruptible.  However, instead of failing the freezer we can try to use the
> > time left and thaw the tasks that have already been frozen without
> > clearing the
> 
> No, we can't do that:
> 
> Imagine we have single uninterruptible task that waits for disk. It
> would exit uninterruptible state in 10msec, *but* you give up and
> unfreeze all. Now, another task goes uninterruptible waiting for
> disk and situation repeats. Livelock.

For how many times would that have to repeat before 30s of timeout expires?

Sorry, but I don't buy this argument. :-)

> Yes, this might play with races in interresting ways and help fuse,
> but we do not want the livelock in the first place.

I think that the "livelock" will never happen.

Besides, we can add another timeout for breaking the loop from a "locked up"
state.  Anyway, waiting for 20s (as without the patch) when it is _certain_
that we will fail doesn't make sense ...

Greetings,
Rafael


-- 
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil." - Donald Knuth