|author||Tejun Heo <firstname.lastname@example.org>||2011-11-21 12:32:22 -0800|
|committer||Tejun Heo <email@example.com>||2011-11-21 12:32:22 -0800|
freezer: don't unnecessarily set PF_NOFREEZE explicitly
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 <firstname.lastname@example.org> Acked-by: "Gustavo F. Padovan" <email@example.com> Acked-by: Samuel Ortiz <firstname.lastname@example.org> Cc: Marcel Holtmann <email@example.com> Cc: wwang <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/power')
1 files changed, 1 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/power/freezing-of-tasks.txt b/Documentation/power/freezing-of-tasks.txt
index 316c2ba187f..587e0828053 100644
@@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ III. Which kernel threads are freezable?
Kernel threads are not freezable by default. However, a kernel thread may clear
PF_NOFREEZE for itself by calling set_freezable() (the resetting of PF_NOFREEZE
-directly is strongly discouraged). From this point it is regarded as freezable
+directly is not allowed). From this point it is regarded as freezable
and must call try_to_freeze() in a suitable place.
IV. Why do we do that?