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:2.445 / U:0.032 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site