[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1502121340320.20672@pobox.suse.cz>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 13:42:01 +0100 (CET)
From: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
live-patching@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Seth Jennings <sjenning@...hat.com>,
Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 6/9] livepatch: create per-task consistency model
On Thu, 12 Feb 2015, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Well, the fact indisputable fact is that there is a demand for this. It's
> > not about one machine, it's about scheduling dowtimes of datacentres.
>
> The changelog says:
>
> > ... A patch can remain in the
> > transition state indefinitely, if any of the tasks are stuck in the
> > previous universe.
>
> Therefore there is no scheduling anything. Without timeliness guarantees
> you can't make a schedule.
>
> Might as well just reboot, at least that's fairly well guaranteed to
> happen.
All running (reasonably alive) tasks will be running patched code though.
You can't just claim complete victory (and get ready for accepting another
patch, etc) if there is a long-time sleeper that hasn't been converted
yet.
--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists