Re: [RFC PATCH 6/9] livepatch: create per-task consistency model

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 01:25:14PM +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Feb 2015, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> > Its not at all clear how all this would work to me. And I'm not
> > motivated enough to go try and reverse engineer your patch; IMO
> > livepatching is utter fail.
> > 
> > If your infrastructure relies on the uptime of a single machine you've
> > lost already.
> 
> Well, the fact indisputable fact is that there is a demand for this. It's 
> not about one machine, it's about scheduling dowtimes of datacentres.

The changelog says:

 > ... A patch can remain in the
 > transition state indefinitely, if any of the tasks are stuck in the
 > previous universe.

Therefore there is no scheduling anything. Without timeliness guarantees
you can't make a schedule.

Might as well just reboot, at least that's fairly well guaranteed to
happen.
--
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/