[Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] cleaning up kthread freezer hell, part 2
Rafael J. Wysocki
rjw at rjwysocki.net
Fri Jul 8 23:19:53 UTC 2016
On Saturday, July 09, 2016 12:31:33 AM Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On last year's kernel summit, I've been talking about why I consider
> kthread freezer harmful and why it ultimately should be removed. LWN
> coverage of that session is here:
>
> https://lwn.net/Articles/662703/
>
> During the past year, I've invested a bit of a time into actually looking
> deeper into the dark corners of kernel sources to see how kthread freezer
> is used throughout the codebase, with the intent to ultimately fix all the
> buggy places. While doing that, I was petrified by two facts:
>
> - there are a *lot* of places where kthread freezer is used in a
> completely buggy (or useless) way
>
> - one of the obstacles fixing it are maintainers who actually don't
> understand the purpose of the kthread freezer (the usual pattern is that
> the main kthread loop has been copy/pasted from different code, which
> already used freezer, and so disease spreads)
>
> Therefore I'd propose a v2 of the last year's session; first summarizing
> the horrible experience I've done on this kthread freezer journey, and as
> a followup, try to (re-)explain the issue and the way I think it should be
> resolved.
Yes, please.
Let me know if/how I can help.
> The idea is to get as much coverage among high-profile maintainers as
> possible, in a hope that this will result in ultimate tree-wide cleanup of
> the current mess. That's why I propose this as a core topic rather than
> tech topic, although it might sound like a rather bordeline one.
I guess that first needs to be "core" so it can become "tech" later when
everybody is on the same page in general.
Thanks,
Rafael
More information about the Ksummit-discuss
mailing list