[pm] Re: JFFS2 swsusp / signal cleanup.

[Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>]

Hi!

> > Should I do recalc_sigpending() instead of flush_signals(current)?
> 
> Yes. You can do that unconditionally, too -- no need to do it depending
> on an argument from the caller.

Yes, and it actually works that way. Good.

[Patrick, this patch is probably good idea, flush_signals has
potential to loose some signal].

[flag argument can be killed, but I guess its bad idea to do it now].

								Pavel

--- tmp/linux/kernel/power/process.c	2003-08-27 12:00:53.000000000 +0200
+++ linux/kernel/power/process.c	2003-10-05 21:15:21.000000000 +0200
@@ -49,10 +49,7 @@
 	pr_debug("%s entered refrigerator\n", current->comm);
 	printk("=");
 	current->flags &= ~PF_FREEZE;
-	if (flag)
-		flush_signals(current); /* We have signaled a kernel thread, which isn't normal behaviour
-					   and that may lead to 100%CPU sucking because those threads
-					   just don't manage signals. */
+	recalc_sigpending(); /* We sent fake signal, clean it up */
 	current->flags |= PF_FROZEN;
 	while (current->flags & PF_FROZEN)
 		schedule();

-- 
When do you have a heart between your knees?
[Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?]