| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
At present, the value of timeout for freezing is 20s, which is
meaningless in case that one thread is frozen with mutex locked
and another thread is trying to lock the mutex, as this time of
freezing will fail unavoidably.
And if there is no new wakeup event registered, the system will
waste at most 20s for such meaningless trying of freezing.
With this patch, the value of timeout can be configured to smaller
value, so such meaningless trying of freezing will be aborted in
earlier time, and later freezing can be also triggered in earlier
time. And more power will be saved.
In normal case on mobile phone, it costs real little time to freeze
processes. On some platform, it only costs about 20ms to freeze
user space processes and 10ms to freeze kernel freezable threads.
Signed-off-by: Liu Chuansheng <chuansheng.liu@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Li Fei <fei.li@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The file Documentation/power/freezing-of-tasks.txt was still referencing
the TIF_FREEZE flag, that was removed by the commit
d88e4cb67197d007fb778d62fe17360e970d5bfa(freezer: remove now unused
TIF_FREEZE).
This patch removes all the references of TIF_FREEZE that were left
behind.
Signed-off-by: Marcos Paulo de Souza <marcos.souza.org@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The way the different freeze/thaw functions encapsulate each other are quite
lovely from a design point of view. And as a side-effect, the way in which
they are invoked (cleaning up on failure for example) differs significantly
from how usual functions are dealt with. This is because of the underlying
semantics that govern the freezing and thawing of various tasks.
This subtle aspect that differentiates these functions from the rest, is
worth documenting.
Many thanks to Tejun Heo for providing enlightenment on this topic.
Signed-off-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
In a paragraph, "kernel thread" is mistakenly written as "kernel". Fix this by
adding thread after word "kernel".
Changes are shown in multiple lines, as they are realigned to 80 col width.
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@st.com>
Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Update the documentation to explain the perils of directly using
mutex_[un]lock(&pm_mutex) and recommend the usage of the safe
APIs [un]lock_system_sleep() instead.
Signed-off-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
There is no reason to export two functions for entering the
refrigerator. Calling refrigerator() instead of try_to_freeze()
doesn't save anything noticeable or removes any race condition.
* Rename refrigerator() to __refrigerator() and make it return bool
indicating whether it scheduled out for freezing.
* Update try_to_freeze() to return bool and relay the return value of
__refrigerator() if freezing().
* Convert all refrigerator() users to try_to_freeze().
* Update documentation accordingly.
* While at it, add might_sleep() to try_to_freeze().
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Samuel Ortiz <samuel@sortiz.org>
Cc: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@redhat.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: KONISHI Ryusuke <konishi.ryusuke@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Some drivers set PF_NOFREEZE in their kthread functions which is
completely unnecessary and racy - some part of freezer code doesn't
consider cases where PF_NOFREEZE is set asynchronous to freezer
operations.
In general, there's no reason to allow setting PF_NOFREEZE explicitly.
Remove them and change the documentation to note that setting
PF_NOFREEZE directly isn't allowed.
-v2: Dropped change to twl4030-irq.c as it no longer uses PF_NOFREEZE.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Acked-by: "Gustavo F. Padovan" <padovan@profusion.mobi>
Acked-by: Samuel Ortiz <sameo@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>
Cc: wwang <wei_wang@realsil.com.cn>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This patch:
* Substitutes some obsolete references to kernel/power/process.c by
kernel/freezer.c.
* Mentions kernel/freezer.c as being part of the "freezer" code along
with the rest of the files.
* Fixes a trivial typo.
Signed-off-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The freezer should not send signals to kernel threads, since that may lead to
subtle problems. In particular, commit
b74d0deb968e1f85942f17080eace015ce3c332c has changed recalc_sigpending_tsk()
so that it doesn't clear TIF_SIGPENDING. For this reason, if the freezer
continues to send fake signals to kernel threads and the freezing of kernel
threads fails, some of them may be running with TIF_SIGPENDING set forever.
Accordingly, recalc_sigpending_tsk() shouldn't set the task's TIF_SIGPENDING
flag if TIF_FREEZE is set.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: Nigel Cunningham <nigel@nigel.suspend2.net>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
One important reason to freeze tasks, which is that we don't want them to
allocate memory after freeing it for the hibernation image, has not been
documented. Fix it.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Acked-by: Nigel Cunningham <nigel@nigel.suspend2.net>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
freezing-of-tasks.txt mentions firmware issues without mentioning the use
of the new notifier API to overcome them. Here's an update.
Signed-off-by: Oliver Neukum <oneukum@suse.de>
Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Acked-by: Nigel Cunningham <nigel@nigel.suspend2.net>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
|
|
|
Currently, the freezer treats all tasks as freezable, except for the kernel
threads that explicitly set the PF_NOFREEZE flag for themselves. This
approach is problematic, since it requires every kernel thread to either
set PF_NOFREEZE explicitly, or call try_to_freeze(), even if it doesn't
care for the freezing of tasks at all.
It seems better to only require the kernel threads that want to or need to
be frozen to use some freezer-related code and to remove any
freezer-related code from the other (nonfreezable) kernel threads, which is
done in this patch.
The patch causes all kernel threads to be nonfreezable by default (ie. to
have PF_NOFREEZE set by default) and introduces the set_freezable()
function that should be called by the freezable kernel threads in order to
unset PF_NOFREEZE. It also makes all of the currently freezable kernel
threads call set_freezable(), so it shouldn't cause any (intentional)
change of behaviour to appear. Additionally, it updates documentation to
describe the freezing of tasks more accurately.
[akpm@linux-foundation.org: build fixes]
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>
Acked-by: Nigel Cunningham <nigel@nigel.suspend2.net>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Cc: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
|
