lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Apr]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH v1.9 05/14] sched: horrible way to detect whether a task has been preempted
    On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 10:07:10AM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
    > On Thu 2016-04-07 09:34:03, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
    > > On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 11:47:00AM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
    > > > On Wed 2016-04-06 11:33:56, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
    > > > > On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 03:06:19PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
    > > > We could even move this check into the livepatch code but then
    > > > print_context_stack_reliable() will not always give reliable results.
    > >
    > > Why would moving the check to the livepatch code affect the reliability
    > > of print_context_stack_reliable()?
    >
    > print_context_stack_reliable() is a generic function that might
    > eventualy be used also outside livepatch code. If there is
    > preempt_schedule_irq() on the stack, it means that the rest
    > of the stack might be unreliable and it should be detected
    > by the function itself.

    Ah, I see now. I actually thought you meant something else (moving
    in_preempt_schedule_irq() itself to livepatch code, but still calling it
    from print_context_stack_reliable()).

    > Let's forget the idea of moving the check into the livepatch
    > code :-)

    Agreed :-)

    --
    Josh

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2016-04-08 17:01    [W:4.070 / U:0.056 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site