From: Josh Poimboeuf <[email protected]>
To: Song Liu <[email protected]>
Cc: Rik van Riel <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>,
Kernel Team <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [RFC] sched,livepatch: call klp_try_switch_task in __cond_resched
Date: Tue, 10 May 2022 16:04:02 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220510230402.e5ymkwt45sg7bd35@treble> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 07:45:49PM +0000, Song Liu wrote:
> >> A KLP transition preempt notifier would help those
> >> kernel threads transition to the new KLP version at
> >> any time they reschedule.
> >
> > ... unless cond_resched() is a no-op due to CONFIG_PREEMPT?
>
> Based on my understanding (and a few other folks we chatted with),
> a kernel thread can legally run for extended time, as long as it
> calls cond_resched() at a reasonable frequency. Therefore, I
> think we should be able to patch such thread easily, unless it
> calls cond_resched() with being-patched function in the stack,
> of course.
But again, with CONFIG_PREEMPT, that doesn't work.
> OTOH, Petr's mindset of allowing many minutes for the patch
> transition is new to me. I need to think more about it.
> Josh, what’s you opinion on this? IIUC, kpatch is designed to
> only wait up to 60 seconds (no option to overwrite the time).
I wouldn't be necessarily opposed to changing the kpatch timeout to
something bigger, or eliminating it altogether in favor of a WARN()
after x minutes.
> >> How much it will help is hard to predict, but I should
> >> be able to get results from a fairly large sample size
> >> of systems within a few weeks :)
> >
> > As Peter said, keep in mind that we will need to fix other cases beyond
> > Facebook, i.e., CONFIG_PREEMPT combined with non-x86 arches which don't
> > have ORC so they can't reliably unwind from an IRQ.
>
> I think livepatch transition may fail in different cases, and we
> don't need to address all of them in one shoot. Fixing some cases
> is an improvement as long as we don't slow down other cases. I
> understand that adding tiny overhead to __cond_resched() may end
> up as a visible regression. But maybe adding it to
> preempt_schedule_common() is light enough?
>
> Did I miss/misunderstand something?
If it's a real bug, we should fix it everywhere, not just for Facebook.
Otherwise CONFIG_PREEMPT and/or non-x86 arches become second-class
citizens.
--
Josh
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-10 23:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <[email protected]>
[not found] ` <YnkuFrm1YR46OFx/@alley>
[not found] ` <[email protected]>
[not found] ` <YnoawYtoCSvrK7lb@alley>
[not found] ` <[email protected]>
[not found] ` <YnqIcw+dYsWz/w7g@alley>
[not found] ` <[email protected]>
[not found] ` <20220510165244.ikfh64ertnvodxb4@treble>
[not found] ` <[email protected]>
2022-05-10 18:42 ` [RFC] sched,livepatch: call klp_try_switch_task in __cond_resched Josh Poimboeuf
[not found] ` <[email protected]>
2022-05-10 23:04 ` Josh Poimboeuf [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20220510230402.e5ymkwt45sg7bd35@treble \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
[email protected] \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox