lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jun]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] livepatch: Send a fake signal periodically
On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 09:17:52AM +0200, Miroslav Benes wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Jun 2018, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 04:16:35PM +0200, Miroslav Benes wrote:
> > > An administrator may send a fake signal to all remaining blocking tasks
> > > of a running transition by writing to
> > > /sys/kernel/livepatch/<patch>/signal attribute. Let's do it
> > > automatically after 10 seconds. The timeout is chosen deliberately. It
> > > gives the tasks enough time to transition themselves.
> > >
> > > Theoretically, sending it once should be more than enough. Better be safe
> > > than sorry, so send it periodically.
> >
> > This is the part I don't understand. Why do it periodically?
>
> I met (rare!) cases when doing it once was not enough due to a race and
> the signal was missed. However involved testcases were really artificial.
>
> > Instead, might it make sense to just send the signals once, and if that
> > doesn't work, reverse the transition? Then we could make patching a
> > synchronous operation. But then, it might be remotely possible that the
> > reverse operation also stalls (e.g., on a kthread). So, maybe it's best
> > to just leave all these controls in the hands of the user.
>
> And there is 'force' option...
>
> So given all this, I'd call klp_send_signals() once and then leave it up
> to the user. Would that work for you?

Well, I don't know. Since the patching process will already need to be
managed by user space, what's the benefit of having the kernel doing
only this part of it?

--
Josh

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-06-05 16:02    [W:0.038 / U:3.828 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site