[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.21.2109221458230.442@pobox.suse.cz>
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 15:05:03 +0200 (CEST)
From: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
cc: gor@...ux.ibm.com, jpoimboe@...hat.com, jikos@...nel.org,
pmladek@...e.com, mingo@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
joe.lawrence@...hat.com, fweisbec@...il.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
hca@...ux.ibm.com, svens@...ux.ibm.com, sumanthk@...ux.ibm.com,
live-patching@...r.kernel.org, paulmck@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 5/7] sched,livepatch: Use wake_up_if_idle()
> @@ -405,8 +405,10 @@ void klp_try_complete_transition(void)
> for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
> task = idle_task(cpu);
> if (cpu_online(cpu)) {
> - if (!klp_try_switch_task(task))
> - complete = false;
> + int ret = klp_try_switch_task(task);
> + if (ret == -EBUSY)
> + wake_up_if_idle(cpu);
> + complete = !ret;
This is broken. You can basically change "complete" only to false (when it
applies). This could leave some tasks in the old patching state.
Anyway, I like the patch set a lot. It moves our infrastructure to a
proper (I hope so) API and it removes few quirks we have along the way.
I'll play with it some more.
Thanks
Miroslav
Powered by blists - more mailing lists