From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 13:44:03 +0100 From: Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 13/15] livepatch: change to a per-task consistency model Message-ID: <20180125124403.GE2228@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20180125090444.GB2339@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20180125102414.wu5od5ye5nmx2ckl@pathway.suse.cz> <20180125103855.GC2228@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20180125121321.6rzrl5rsrvewxn7j@pathway.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20180125121321.6rzrl5rsrvewxn7j@pathway.suse.cz> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: To: Petr Mladek Cc: Josh Poimboeuf , Jessica Yu , Jiri Kosina , Miroslav Benes , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, live-patching@vger.kernel.org, Michael Ellerman , Heiko Carstens , x86@kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Vojtech Pavlik , Jiri Slaby , Chris J Arges , Andy Lutomirski , Ingo Molnar , Kamalesh Babulal , Balbir Singh List-ID: On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 01:13:21PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote: > > What I was getting at, the klp stuff is the very first thing we run when > > we schedule the idle task, but its placed at the very end of the > > function. This is confusing. > > I see. > > > > The above still doesn't help with solving that. Do you want to run > > something before we go idle, or before we leave idle, in neither cases > > would I place it where it is. > > In fact, both ways are fine. We require going the idle task > through the entire cycle anyway. It is because both situations, > too long idling or non-idling, would block finishing the patch > transition. > > Feel free to move it right before schedule_idle() or > __current_set_polling(). OK, I'll move it. Thanks!