On Tue, 17 May 2016, Jessica Yu wrote: > What about tasks sleeping on affected functions in uninterruptible sleep > (possibly indefinitely)? Since all signals are ignored, we wouldn't be > able to patch those tasks in this way, right? Would that be an > unsupported case? I don't think there is any better way out of this situation than documenting that the convergence of patching could in such cases could take quite a lot of time (well, we can pro-actively try to detect this situation before the patching actually start, and warn about the possible consequences). But let's face it, this should be pretty uncommon, because (a) it's not realistic for the wait times to be really indefinite (b) the task is likely to be in TASK_KILLABLE rather than just plain TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE. -- Jiri Kosina 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
