On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 04:49:41PM +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Thu, 5 Nov 2015, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > > > > I fail to see why this kthread should be freezable at all. There is no way > > > for w1 device to generate new I/O requests that should be written out to > > > filesystem, is it? > > > > w1 doesn't generate such requests, but it was more to make this thread > > consistent with majority of other threads in the kernel. > > Most of which actually don't need freezer at all, and only contribute to > the overall confusion regarding what kthread freezer is actually for. > > It's my long-term goal to fix this situation (and this patch is part of > some preparatory steps :) ). > > > Ok, I'm not against it, Greg please pull this patch into your tree. > > > > Acked-by: Evgeniy Polyakov <[email protected]> > > Greg, do you plan to take this please? I don't seem to see it in > linux-next as of today.
Give me a chance to catch up on things, the merge window was just over and I just returned from another conference... thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
