From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753646Ab1I1HyS (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Sep 2011 03:54:18 -0400 Received: from beauty.rexursive.com ([150.101.121.179]:54658 "EHLO beauty.rexursive.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751377Ab1I1HyR (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Sep 2011 03:54:17 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH v5]: Improve performance of LZO hibernation From: Bojan Smojver To: Pekka Enberg Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 17:54:16 +1000 In-Reply-To: References: <1317183650.2067.10.camel@shrek.rexursive.com> <1317194947.1998.18.camel@shrek.rexursive.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.0.3 (3.0.3-1.fc15) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <1317196456.1998.24.camel@shrek.rexursive.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2011-09-28 at 10:48 +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote: > > The compression/decompression threads stop by breaking out of the > loop. > > At least they should, right? Did I misread some docs here? > > Yes, the threads are stopped. What happens after that? Will the > hibernation process be aborted? How can this be tested? I'm guessing here that you mean that parts of the kernel other than hibernation code itself can do this (i.e. set the flag for the thread to stop, so kthread_should_stop() returns true). Correct? If that is a possibility (which I didn't take into account at all), I will need to rewrite so that if such a thing happens, we abort the hibernation process. It should not be difficult. Right now, this would result in - well I don't know what exactly - most likely corrupted data on disk or on memory. -- Bojan