From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754886Ab3BDMQd (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Feb 2013 07:16:33 -0500 Received: from hydra.sisk.pl ([212.160.235.94]:36211 "EHLO hydra.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754674Ab3BDMQZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Feb 2013 07:16:25 -0500 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: "Liu, Chuansheng" Cc: Alan Stern , "Li, Fei" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH V4] suspend: enable freeze timeout configuration through sys Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2013 13:22:42 +0100 Message-ID: <2394748.6YpH0CJTqu@vostro.rjw.lan> User-Agent: KMail/4.9.5 (Linux/3.8.0-rc6; KDE/4.9.5; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <27240C0AC20F114CBF8149A2696CBE4A222AEB@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <27240C0AC20F114CBF8149A2696CBE4A222AEB@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Monday, February 04, 2013 04:32:11 AM Liu, Chuansheng wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Alan Stern [mailto:stern@rowland.harvard.edu] > > Sent: Monday, February 04, 2013 11:16 AM > > To: Li, Fei > > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki; akpm@linux-foundation.org; > > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-pm@vger.kernel.org; Liu, Chuansheng > > Subject: RE: [PATCH V4] suspend: enable freeze timeout configuration through > > sys > > > > On Mon, 4 Feb 2013, Li, Fei wrote: > > > > > > -> the situation described above shouldn't happen and if it does, then there > > > > is a bug that needs to be fixed. > > > > > > Yes, we agree with that it's a bug that needs to be fixed, and we are already > > done > > > for some cases. > > > During the process, we realize that tuning the timeout value to smaller value > > will help > > > to expose freezing failure for some cases. > > > > Besides, the underlying bug is well known (fuse filesystems hanging > > because the fuse daemon gets frozen before the process doing file I/O, > > or something like that) and so far nobody has a good idea of how to > > fix it. > Indeed, we have some well-known deadlock issues existed there. > And once there is deadlock case, this patch is helpful to the user experience, > because 20s is pointless for those deadlock case. > > Also even adjusting the 20s to 2s, we still can get to know the process stack who rejecting the freezing, > so this freezing configuration is really helpful to avoid 20s waiting for that deadlock case. > Alan and Rafael, could you consider this patch? Thanks. OK, I'll take it. Thanks, Rafael -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.