From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: Li Fei <fei.li@intel.com>,
pavel@ucw.cz, rjw@sisk.pl, len.brown@intel.com, mingo@redhat.com,
peterz@infradead.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, gorcunov@openvz.org,
rientjes@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, chuansheng.liu@intel.com,
biao.wang@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] freezer: configure user space process frozen along with kernel threads
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 12:28:12 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87obfeivc3.fsf@xmission.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1302201021210.1671-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org> (Alan Stern's message of "Wed, 20 Feb 2013 10:24:12 -0500 (EST)")
Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> writes:
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2013, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
>> Why can't the fuse filesystem freeze when there are requests pending?
>
> It _can_ freeze (that is, the fuse daemon can). The problem is that
> tasks _using_ the fuse filsystem can't if the daemon doesn't respond.
Which is what I meant when I said that the fuse filesystem couldn't
freeze.
> These tasks are stuck in uninterruptible wait states deep in the
> filesystem layer, probably holding important locks. They can't be
> frozen until the outstanding requests complete.
Why is it that processes that can be preempted can't be frozen?
At most I would suggest that processes be frozen in reverse priority
order. Which unless there is a priority inversion should solve this
problem without an additional proc file.
Adding a userspace interface that doesn't come close to doing the right
thing automatically and that is brittle and will likely fail in ways
even stranger and harder to track ways than fuse is failing today seems
like totally the wrong direction to go. Not adding any permission
checks to the proc files just compounds the problem.
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-20 20:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-02-20 2:15 [PATCH] freezer: configure user space process frozen along with kernel threads Li Fei
2013-02-20 9:05 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2013-02-20 13:46 ` Li, Fei
2013-02-20 13:51 ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-02-20 15:24 ` Alan Stern
2013-02-20 20:28 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2013-02-20 20:48 ` Alan Stern
2013-02-20 21:36 ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-02-20 21:58 ` Alan Stern
2013-02-20 22:49 ` Pavel Machek
2013-02-20 22:39 ` Pavel Machek
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=87obfeivc3.fsf@xmission.com \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=biao.wang@intel.com \
--cc=chuansheng.liu@intel.com \
--cc=fei.li@intel.com \
--cc=gorcunov@openvz.org \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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