Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 10 May 2022 09:52:44 -0700
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>
To:     Rik van Riel <riel@fb.com>
Cc:     "pmladek@suse.com" <pmladek@suse.com>,
        "song@kernel.org" <song@kernel.org>,
        "joe.lawrence@redhat.com" <joe.lawrence@redhat.com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>,
        "peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
        "mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "vincent.guittot@linaro.org" <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        "live-patching@vger.kernel.org" <live-patching@vger.kernel.org>,
        "jpoimboe@redhat.com" <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
        Kernel Team <Kernel-team@fb.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] sched,livepatch: call klp_try_switch_task in __cond_resched
Message-ID: <20220510165244.ikfh64ertnvodxb4@treble>
References: <20220507174628.2086373-1-song@kernel.org>
 <YnkuFrm1YR46OFx/@alley>
 <9C7DF147-5112-42E7-9F7C-7159EFDFB766@fb.com>
 <YnoawYtoCSvrK7lb@alley>
 <3a9bfb4a52b715bd8739d8834409c9549ec7f22f.camel@fb.com>
 <YnqIcw+dYsWz/w7g@alley>
 <6bf85ff908377508a5f5bcc7c4e75d598b96f388.camel@fb.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <6bf85ff908377508a5f5bcc7c4e75d598b96f388.camel@fb.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 04:07:42PM +0000, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Tue, 2022-05-10 at 17:44 +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > On Tue 2022-05-10 13:33:13, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2022-05-10 at 09:56 +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > > 
> > 
> > > I think the best approach for us might be to just track what
> > > is causing the transition failures, and send in trivial patches
> > > to make the outer loop in such kernel threads do the same KLP
> > > transition the idle task already does.
> > 
> > I am afraid that is a way to hell. We might end up in doing
> > really crazy things if we want to complete the transition
> > in one minute.
> > 
> Now I wonder if we could just hook up a preempt notifier
> for kernel live patches. All the distro kernels already
> need the preempt notifier for KVM, anyway...
> 
> Is it crazy? Maybe a little.
> 
> Is it self contained, and something that could be done
> without inserting any extra code into a hot path while
> not in the middle of a KLP transition? Yes.
> 
> I'd be happy to come up with a patch that does that,
> unless anybody has good reasons I should not :)

I wouldn't be opposed to that, but how does it solve this problem?  If
as Peter said cond_resched() can be a NOP, then preemption would have to
be from an interrupt, in which case frame pointers aren't reliable.

-- 
Josh