On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 10:07:10AM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:

On Thu 2016-04-07 09:34:03, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 11:47:00AM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:

quoted

On Wed 2016-04-06 11:33:56, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 03:06:19PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:

We could even move this check into the livepatch code but then
print_context_stack_reliable() will not always give reliable results.

Why would moving the check to the livepatch code affect the reliability
of print_context_stack_reliable()?

print_context_stack_reliable() is a generic function that might
eventualy be used also outside livepatch code. If there is
preempt_schedule_irq() on the stack, it means that the rest
of the stack might be unreliable and it should be detected
by the function itself.

Ah, I see now.  I actually thought you meant something else (moving
in_preempt_schedule_irq() itself to livepatch code, but still calling it
from print_context_stack_reliable()).

Let's forget the idea of moving the check into the livepatch
code :-)

Agreed :-)

-- 
Josh