| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
We don't need to check if todo is positive before calling time_after() in
try_to_freeze_tasks(), because if todo is zero at this point, the loop will be
broken anyway due to the while () condition being false.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
|
|
Make try_to_freeze_tasks() and freeze_processes() return -EBUSY on failure
instead of the number of unfrozen tasks (none of the callers actually uses
this number).
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
|
|
Use __set_current_state() as appropriate in refrigerator() instead of
accessing current->state directly.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
|
|
Kernel threads should not have TIF_FREEZE set when user space processes are
being frozen, since otherwise some of them might be frozen prematurely.
To prevent this from happening we can (1) make exit_mm() unset TIF_FREEZE
unconditionally just after clearing tsk->mm and (2) make try_to_freeze_tasks()
check if p->mm is different from zero and PF_BORROWED_MM is unset in p->flags
when user space processes are to be frozen.
Namely, when user space processes are being frozen, we only should set
TIF_FREEZE for tasks that have p->mm different from NULL and don't have
PF_BORROWED_MM set in p->flags. For this reason task_lock() must be used to
prevent try_to_freeze_tasks() from racing with use_mm()/unuse_mm(), in which
p->mm and p->flags.PF_BORROWED_MM are changed under task_lock(p). Also, we
need to prevent the following scenario from happening:
* daemonize() is called by a task spawned from a user space code path
* freezer checks if the task has p->mm set and the result is positive
* task enters exit_mm() and clears its TIF_FREEZE
* freezer sets TIF_FREEZE for the task
* task calls try_to_freeze() and goes to the refrigerator, which is wrong at
that point
This requires us to acquire task_lock(p) before p->flags.PF_BORROWED_MM and
p->mm are examined and release it after TIF_FREEZE is set for p (or it turns
out that TIF_FREEZE should not be set).
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: Nigel Cunningham <nigel@nigel.suspend2.net>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
|
|
To see which tasks are stuck where.
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Cc: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
|
|
Steve Hawkes discovered a problem where recalc_sigpending_tsk was called in
do_sigaction but no signal_wake_up call was made, preventing later signals
from waking up blocked threads with TIF_SIGPENDING already set.
In fact, the few other calls to recalc_sigpending_tsk outside the signals
code are also subject to this problem in other race conditions.
This change makes recalc_sigpending_tsk private to the signals code. It
changes the outside calls, as well as do_sigaction, to use the new
recalc_sigpending_and_wake instead.
Signed-off-by: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
Cc: <Steve.Hawkes@motorola.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
|
|
Other than refrigerator, no one else calls frozen_process(). So move it from
include/linux/freezer.h to kernel/power/process.c.
Also, since a task can be marked as frozen by itself, we don't need to pass
the (struct task_struct *p) parameter to frozen_process().
Signed-off-by: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
|
|
Kernel threads can become userland processes by calling kernel_execve().
In particular, this may happen right after the try_to_freeze_tasks()
called with FREEZER_USER_SPACE has returned, so try_to_freeze_tasks()
needs to take userspace processes into consideration even if it is
called with FREEZER_KERNEL_THREADS.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
|
|
Currently try_to_freeze_tasks() has to wait until all of the vforked processes
exit and for this reason every user can make it fail. To fix this problem we
can introduce the additional process flag PF_FREEZER_SKIP to be used by tasks
that do not want to be counted as freezable by the freezer and want to have
TIF_FREEZE set nevertheless. Then, this flag can be set by tasks using
sys_vfork() before they call wait_for_completion(&vfork) and cleared after
they have woken up. After clearing it, the tasks should call try_to_freeze()
as soon as possible.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
|
|
If the freezing of tasks fails and a task is preempted in refrigerator()
before calling frozen_process(), then thaw_tasks() may run before this task is
frozen. In that case the task will freeze and no one will thaw it.
To fix this race we can call freezing(current) in refrigerator() along with
frozen_process(current) under the task_lock() which also should be taken in
the error path of try_to_freeze_tasks() as well as in thaw_process().
Moreover, if thaw_process() additionally clears TIF_FREEZE for tasks that are
not frozen, we can be sure that all tasks are thawed and there are no pending
"freeze" requests after thaw_tasks() has run.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
|
|
Remove includes of <linux/smp_lock.h> where it is not used/needed.
Suggested by Al Viro.
Builds cleanly on x86_64, i386, alpha, ia64, powerpc, sparc,
sparc64, and arm (all 59 defconfigs).
Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
|
|
Except for BUG_ON() checks, we should not use EXIT_XXXX defines outside of
exit/wait paths.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
|
|
refrigerator() can miss a wakeup, "wait event" loop needs a proper memory
ordering.
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Acked-by: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
|
|
Currently, to tell a task that it should go to the refrigerator, we set the
PF_FREEZE flag for it and send a fake signal to it. Unfortunately there
are two SMP-related problems with this approach. First, a task running on
another CPU may be updating its flags while the freezer attempts to set
PF_FREEZE for it and this may leave the task's flags in an inconsistent
state. Second, there is a potential race between freeze_process() and
refrigerator() in which freeze_process() running on one CPU is reading a
task's PF_FREEZE flag while refrigerator() running on another CPU has just
set PF_FROZEN for the same task and attempts to reset PF_FREEZE for it. If
the refrigerator wins the race, freeze_process() will state that PF_FREEZE
hasn't been set for the task and will set it unnecessarily, so the task
will go to the refrigerator once again after it's been thawed.
To solve first of these problems we need to stop using PF_FREEZE to tell
tasks that they should go to the refrigerator. Instead, we can introduce a
special TIF_*** flag and use it for this purpose, since it is allowed to
change the other tasks' TIF_*** flags and there are special calls for it.
To avoid the freeze_process()-refrigerator() race we can make
freeze_process() to always check the task's PF_FROZEN flag after it's read
its "freeze" flag. We should also make sure that refrigerator() will
always reset the task's "freeze" flag after it's set PF_FROZEN for it.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>
Cc: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Cc: Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
|
|
Currently, if a task is stopped (ie. it's in the TASK_STOPPED state), it
is considered by the freezer as unfreezeable. However, there may be a race
between the freezer and the delivery of the continuation signal to the task
resulting in the task running after we have finished freezing the other
tasks. This, in turn, may lead to undesirable effects up to and including
data corruption.
To prevent this from happening we first need to make the freezer consider
stopped tasks as freezeable. For this purpose we need to make freezeable()
stop returning 0 for these tasks and we need to force them to enter the
refrigerator. However, if there's no continuation signal in the meantime,
the stopped tasks should remain stopped after all processes have been
thawed, so we need to send an additional SIGSTOP to each of them before
waking it up.
Also, a stopped task that has just been woken up should first check if
there's a freezing request for it and go to the refrigerator if that's the
case.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
|
|
Move the loop from freeze_processes() to a separate function and call it
independently for user space processes and kernel threads so that the order
of freezing tasks is clearly visible.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: Nigel Cunningham <nigel@suspend2.net>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
|
|
Move the loop from thaw_processes() to a separate function and call it
independently for kernel threads and user space processes so that the order
of thawing tasks is clearly visible.
Drop thaw_kernel_threads() which is never used.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: Nigel Cunningham <nigel@suspend2.net>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
|
|
Fix http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7534
Fix the freezing of processes so that it won't fail if there is a traced
process the parent of which has been stopped.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: maurice barnum <pixi+kbug@burble.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
|
|
Modify process thawing so that we can thaw kernel space without thawing
userspace, and thaw kernelspace first. This will be useful in later
patches, where I intend to get swsusp thawing kernel threads only before
seeking to free memory.
Signed-off-by: Nigel Cunningham <nigel@suspend2.net>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
|
|
Minor whitespace and formatting modifications for the freezer.
Signed-off-by: Nigel Cunningham <nigel@suspend2.net>
Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
|
|
The freezer currently prints an '=' for every process that is frozen. This
is pretty pointless, as the equals sign says nothing about which process is
frozen, and makes logs look messier (especially if there were a large
number of processes running). All we really need to know is that we
started trying to freeze processes and what processes (if any) failed to
freeze, or that we succeeded.
Signed-off-by: Nigel Cunningham <nigel@suspend2.net>
Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
|
|
Move process freezing functions from include/linux/sched.h to freezer.h, so
that modifications to the freezer or the kernel configuration don't require
recompiling just about everything.
[akpm@osdl.org: fix ueagle driver]
Signed-off-by: Nigel Cunningham <nigel@suspend2.net>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
|
|
It should be possible to suspend, either to RAM or to disk, if there's a
traced process that has just reached a breakpoint. However, this is a
special case, because its parent process might have been frozen already and
then we are unable to deliver the "freeze" signal to the traced process.
If this happens, it's better to cancel the freezing of the traced process.
Ref. http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6787
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
|
|
strace /bin/bash misbehaves after resume; this fixes it.
(akpm: it's scary calling refrigerator() in state TASK_TRACED, but it seems to
do the right thing).
Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
|
|
Allow swsusp to freeze processes successfully under heavy load by freezing
userspace processes before kernel threads.
[Thanks to Nigel Cunningham <nigel@suspend2.net> for suggesting the
way to go.]
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
|
|
Update suspend-to-RAM documentation with new machines, and makes message
when processes can't be stopped little clearer. (In one case, waiting
longer actually did help).
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Warn in the documentation that data may be lost if there are some
filesystems mounted from USB devices before suspend.
[Thanks to Alan Stern for providing the answer to the question in the
Q:-A: part.]
Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
|
|
If process freezing fails, some processes are frozen, and rest are left in
"were asked to be frozen" state. Thats wrong, we should leave it in some
consistent state.
Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
|
|
This should make refrigerator sleep properly, not busywait after the first
schedule() returns.
Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
|
|
freezeable() already tests for TRACED/STOPPED processes, no need to do it
twice.
Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
|
|
1. Establish a simple API for process freezing defined in linux/include/sched.h:
frozen(process) Check for frozen process
freezing(process) Check if a process is being frozen
freeze(process) Tell a process to freeze (go to refrigerator)
thaw_process(process) Restart process
frozen_process(process) Process is frozen now
2. Remove all references to PF_FREEZE and PF_FROZEN from all
kernel sources except sched.h
3. Fix numerous locations where try_to_freeze is manually done by a driver
4. Remove the argument that is no longer necessary from two function calls.
5. Some whitespace cleanup
6. Clear potential race in refrigerator (provides an open window of PF_FREEZE
cleared before setting PF_FROZEN, recalc_sigpending does not check
PF_FROZEN).
This patch does not address the problem of freeze_processes() violating the rule
that a task may only modify its own flags by setting PF_FREEZE. This is not clean
in an SMP environment. freeze(process) is therefore not SMP safe!
Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter <christoph@lameter.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
|
|
Initial git repository build. I'm not bothering with the full history,
even though we have it. We can create a separate "historical" git
archive of that later if we want to, and in the meantime it's about
3.2GB when imported into git - space that would just make the early
git days unnecessarily complicated, when we don't have a lot of good
infrastructure for it.
Let it rip!
|
