[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1604080904290.27368@cbobk.fhfr.pm>
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2016 09:05:28 +0200 (CEST)
From: Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>
To: Jessica Yu <jeyu@...hat.com>
cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
live-patching@...r.kernel.org, Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@...e.com>
Subject: Re: sched: horrible way to detect whether a task has been
preempted
On Thu, 7 Apr 2016, Jessica Yu wrote:
> > Alternatively, without eating up a TIF_ space, it'd be possible to push a
> > magic contents on top of the stack in preempt_schedule_irq() (and pop it
> > once we are returning from there), and if such magic value is detected, we
> > just don't bother and claim unreliability.
>
> Ah, but wouldn't we still have to walk through the frames (i.e. enter
> the loop in patch 7/14) to look for the magic value in this approach?
The idea was that it'd be located at a place to which saved stack pointer
of the sleeping task is pointing to (or at a fixed offset from it).
--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists