Re: freezer problems
From: Rafael J. Wysocki
Date: Sun Feb 18 2007 - 14:01:57 EST
On Sunday, 18 February 2007 17:19, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 02/18, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Sunday, 18 February 2007 15:52, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > >
> > > And now another problem: exec. de_thread() sleeps in TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE
> > > waiting for all sub-threads to die, and we have the same "deadlock" if
> > > one of them is frozen. This is nasty. Probably we can change the ->state
> > > to TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE and add try_to_freeze(), or play with the new PF_
> > > flag, but I am not sure it is safe to freeze() the task which is deep
> > > in the exec() path.
> > Hm, I haven't been aware of this case.
> > Well, probably we can do something like in the patch that I've just sent: the
> > child that enters the refrigerator should know that the parent is
> > uninterruptible and will wait for it to exit. Thus it can either mark the
> > parent as frozen or just exit the refrigerator without freezing itself.
> Sub-thread could already sleep in refrigerator when another thread does exec.
> So we have no choice but somehow freeze the execer. But again, I don't know
> if it is safe to freeze it here, at de_thread() stage. It is called from
> load_xxx_binary(), we may hold some important locks...
So it probably isn't safe.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/