On Tue, 24 May 2016, David Laight wrote:
> > > Related, please can we have a flag for the sleep and/or process so that
> > > an uninterruptible sleep doesn't trigger the 'hung task' detector
> >
> > TASK_KILLABLE
>
> Not sure that does what I want.
> It appears to allow some 'kill' actions to
On Tue, 24 May 2016, David Laight wrote:
> > > Related, please can we have a flag for the sleep and/or process so that
> > > an uninterruptible sleep doesn't trigger the 'hung task' detector
> >
> > TASK_KILLABLE
>
> Not sure that does what I want.
> It appears to allow some 'kill' actions to
From: Jiri Kosina
> Sent: 23 May 2016 19:45
> > Related, please can we have a flag for the sleep and/or process so that
> > an uninterruptible sleep doesn't trigger the 'hung task' detector
>
> TASK_KILLABLE
Not sure that does what I want.
It appears to allow some 'kill' actions to wake the
From: Jiri Kosina
> Sent: 23 May 2016 19:45
> > Related, please can we have a flag for the sleep and/or process so that
> > an uninterruptible sleep doesn't trigger the 'hung task' detector
>
> TASK_KILLABLE
Not sure that does what I want.
It appears to allow some 'kill' actions to wake the
On Mon, 23 May 2016, David Laight wrote:
> Related, please can we have a flag for the sleep and/or process so that
> an uninterruptible sleep doesn't trigger the 'hung task' detector
TASK_KILLABLE
> and also stops the process counting towards the 'load average'.
TASK_NOLOAD
--
Jiri Kosina
On Mon, 23 May 2016, David Laight wrote:
> Related, please can we have a flag for the sleep and/or process so that
> an uninterruptible sleep doesn't trigger the 'hung task' detector
TASK_KILLABLE
> and also stops the process counting towards the 'load average'.
TASK_NOLOAD
--
Jiri Kosina
From: Jiri Kosina
> Sent: 18 May 2016 21:23
> On Wed, 18 May 2016, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
>
> > Yeah, I think this situation -- a task sleeping on an affected function
> > in uninterruptible state for a long period of time -- would be
> > exceedingly rare and not something we need to worry about
From: Jiri Kosina
> Sent: 18 May 2016 21:23
> On Wed, 18 May 2016, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
>
> > Yeah, I think this situation -- a task sleeping on an affected function
> > in uninterruptible state for a long period of time -- would be
> > exceedingly rare and not something we need to worry about
On Wed, 18 May 2016, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> Yeah, I think this situation -- a task sleeping on an affected function
> in uninterruptible state for a long period of time -- would be
> exceedingly rare and not something we need to worry about for now.
Plus in case task'd be in
On Wed, 18 May 2016, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> Yeah, I think this situation -- a task sleeping on an affected function
> in uninterruptible state for a long period of time -- would be
> exceedingly rare and not something we need to worry about for now.
Plus in case task'd be in
On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 10:16:22AM +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> 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
On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 10:16:22AM +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> 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
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
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
+++ Josh Poimboeuf [28/04/16 15:44 -0500]:
[snip]
diff --git a/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.txt
b/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.txt
index 6c43f6e..bee86d0 100644
--- a/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.txt
+++ b/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.txt
@@ -72,7 +72,8 @@ example, they
+++ Josh Poimboeuf [28/04/16 15:44 -0500]:
[snip]
diff --git a/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.txt
b/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.txt
index 6c43f6e..bee86d0 100644
--- a/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.txt
+++ b/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.txt
@@ -72,7 +72,8 @@ example, they
16 matches
Mail list logo
