On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Mandeep Singh Baines wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 9:05 AM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>> On 02/16, Mandeep Singh Baines wrote:
>>>
>>> We don't need to call freezer_do_not_count() for in-kernel users
>>> of CLONE_VFORK since exec will get called in bounded time.
>>>
On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 9:05 AM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 02/16, Mandeep Singh Baines wrote:
>>
>> We don't need to call freezer_do_not_count() for in-kernel users
>> of CLONE_VFORK since exec will get called in bounded time.
>>
>> We don't want to call freezer_count() for in-kernel users because
On 02/16, Mandeep Singh Baines wrote:
>
> We don't need to call freezer_do_not_count() for in-kernel users
> of CLONE_VFORK since exec will get called in bounded time.
>
> We don't want to call freezer_count() for in-kernel users because
> they may be holding locks. freezer_count() calls try_to_fre
We don't need to call freezer_do_not_count() for in-kernel users
of CLONE_VFORK since exec will get called in bounded time.
We don't want to call freezer_count() for in-kernel users because
they may be holding locks. freezer_count() calls try_to_freeze().
We don't want to freeze an in-kernel user
On 02/14, Mandeep Singh Baines wrote:
>
> We don't need to call freezer_do_not_count() for in-kernel users
> of CLONE_VFORK since exec will get called in bounded time.
OK,
> We don't want to call freezer_count() for in-kernel users because
> they may be holding locks.
Who? We should not do this
We don't need to call freezer_do_not_count() for in-kernel users
of CLONE_VFORK since exec will get called in bounded time.
We don't want to call freezer_count() for in-kernel users because
they may be holding locks. freezer_count() calls try_to_freeze().
We don't want to freeze an in-kernel user
6 matches
Mail list logo
