Hi! > --- a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-kernel-livepatch > +++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-kernel-livepatch > @@ -33,6 +33,15 @@ Contact: live-patching@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > An attribute which indicates whether the patch is currently in > transition. > > +What: /sys/kernel/livepatch/<patch>/signal > +Date: Oct 2017 > +KernelVersion: 4.15.0 > +Contact: live-patching@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > +Description: > + A writable attribute that allows administrator to affect the > + course of an existing transition. Writing 1 sends a signal to > + all remaining blocking tasks. What kind of signal? > What: /sys/kernel/livepatch/<patch>/<object> > Date: Nov 2014 > KernelVersion: 3.19.0 > diff --git a/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.txt b/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.txt > index ecdb18104ab0..6694530d0894 100644 > --- a/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.txt > +++ b/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.txt > @@ -178,6 +178,12 @@ transition, it shows -1. Any tasks which are blocking the transition > can be signaled with SIGSTOP and SIGCONT to force them to change their > patched state. > > +Administrator can also affect a transition through > +/sys/kernel/livepatch/<patch>/signal attribute. Writing 1 to the attribute sends > +a signal to all remaining blocking tasks. This is an alternative for > +SIGSTOP/SIGCONT approach mentioned in the previous paragraph. It should also be > +less harmful to the system. Well... If SIGSTOP / SIGCONT is considered harmful (it probably is), it should be mentioned above, and not in note here... Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
