On 02/12/2015, 04:21 AM, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > Ingo, Peter, > > Would you have any objections to making task_rq_lock/unlock() non-static > (or moving them to kernel/sched/sched.h) so they can be called by the > livepatch code? > > To provide some background, I'm looking for a way to temporarily prevent > a sleeping task from running while its stack is examined, to decide > whether it can be safely switched to the new patching "universe". For > more details see klp_transition_task() in the patch below. > > Using task_rq_lock() is the most straightforward way I could find to > achieve that. Hi, I cannot speak whether it is the proper way or not. But if so, would it make sense to do the opposite: expose an API to walk through the processes' stack and make the decision? Concretely, move parts of klp_stacktrace_address_verify_func to sched.c or somewhere in kernel/sched/ and leave task_rq_lock untouched. regards, -- js suse labs -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe live-patching" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
