* Dmitry Adamushko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 01/02/2008, Peter Zijlstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > ---
> > - restore the old wakeup mechanism
>
> and how does it change behavior, logically-wise?
>
> do we somehow miss a 'wake-up' from kthread_stop() so that its caller
> gets blocked until watchdog's msleep_interruptible(10000) timeouts? On
> average, it would take +-5 sec. and might explain the first
> observation of Ravael -- "...adds a 5 - 10 sec delay..." (although,
> lately he reported up to +30 sec. delays).
>
> (/me goint to also try reproducing it later today)
thanks - i cannot reproduce it on my usual suspend/resume testbox
because e1000 broke on it, and this is a pretty annoying regression.
We'll have to undo the hung-tasks detection feature if it's not fixed
quickly. (there's no point in debugging features that _add_ bugs)
Ingo
--
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/
