From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932494AbVHSLer (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Aug 2005 07:34:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932554AbVHSLer (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Aug 2005 07:34:47 -0400 Received: from natfrord.rzone.de ([81.169.145.161]:7358 "EHLO natfrord.rzone.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932494AbVHSLeq (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Aug 2005 07:34:46 -0400 From: Stefan Rompf To: Dave Hansen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Hdaps-devel] Re: HDAPS, Need to park the head for real Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 13:36:36 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200508191336.36832.stefan@loplof.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Dave Hansen wrote: > In reality, that probably means a statically compiled daemon that > mlock()s itself, and any structures that it will need. It _might_ even > need to keep an open file descriptor on the "frozen" file. Because, in > theory, that file could be written out to the sysfs backing store. with such a hassle to make the parking API available, assure that the head parking daemon is not swapped out, can access the filedescriptor, has a priority high enough to start immediatly when needed, wouldn't that qualify for running in kernel space? Stefan