On Fri, 2011-10-14 at 22:52 +0000, brian m. carlson wrote: > Package: linux-2.6 > Version: 3.1.0~rc7-1~experimental.1 > Severity: normal > > This morning I was backing up my laptop to another computer via sshfs > (and fuse). The afio archiver was writing to this sshfs-mounted > location. I decided to abort the operation with Ctrl-C, which caused > the sshfs mount to become unmounted; however, afio was apparently not > affected by the SIGINT (probably because processes in disk IO are > unkillable). I don't understand why SIGINT would be delivered to ssh rather than to afio. > Several hours later, I attempted to suspend my computer and it failed to > do so. The kernel log (attached) indicated that the afio process from > hours before was preventing the suspend. Since processes waiting on > disk IO are unkillable (IMO a bug) and the underlying device to which > afio was writing was long gone, I was forced to reboot the machine in > order to get it to suspend. If I had not noticed that the machine had > failed to suspend, it could have stayed running in my bag and seriously > overheated. > > This could be fixed by: > > * making processes in the D state killable; The D state really means that the thread is running some kernel code that is waiting and cannot handle signals. It *is* possible for kernel code to wait and allow the current thread (and process) to be killed (SIGKILL) but without handling any other signal. However, the code has to be changed to abort if the process is killed. It is not possible to change all such waits at once, as the cleanup code will be different in each case. > * aborting disk IO requests when the underlying device disappears; [...] I believe this should have happened. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings This sentence contradicts itself - no actually it doesn't.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part