Re: live patching design (was: Re: [PATCH 1/3] sched: add sched_task_call())
From: Jiri Kosina
Date: Sun Feb 22 2015 - 04:08:50 EST
On Sun, 22 Feb 2015, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> I am making specific technical arguments, but you attempted to redirect
> my very specific arguments towards 'differences in philosophy' and
> 'where to draw the line'. Lets discuss the merits and brush them aside
> as 'philosophical differences' or a made up category of 'consistency
> Anyway, let me try to reboot this discussion back to technological
> details by summing up my arguments in another mail.
Sounds good, thanks. Don't get me wrong -- I am not really opposing your
solution (because it's of course quite close to what kgraft is doing :p ),
but I'd like to make sure we understand each other well.
I still have to think a little bit more about how to handle kthreads
properly even in your proposed solution (i.e. how exactly is it superior
to what kgraft is currently doing in this respect). We'd have to go
through all them anyway, and make them parkable, right?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/