Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751501AbaKFTfK (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Nov 2014 14:35:10 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:46106 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751051AbaKFTfH (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Nov 2014 14:35:07 -0500 Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2014 13:34:33 -0600 From: Josh Poimboeuf To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Vojtech Pavlik , Seth Jennings , Jiri Kosina , Steven Rostedt , live-patching@vger.kernel.org, kpatch@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Kernel Live Patching Message-ID: <20141106193433.GA16347@treble.redhat.com> References: <1415284748-14648-1-git-send-email-sjenning@redhat.com> <20141106184446.GA12779@infradead.org> <20141106185157.GB29272@suse.cz> <20141106185857.GA7106@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20141106185857.GA7106@infradead.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23.1 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 10:58:57AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 07:51:57PM +0100, Vojtech Pavlik wrote: > > I don't think this specific example was generated. So there are two ways to use this live patching API: using a generated module (e.g., using the kpatch-build tool) or manually compiling a module via kbuild. Vojtech's right, the provided example was not generated. Maybe it belongs in samples/livepatch? > > > > I also don't think including the whole kpatch automation into the kernel > > tree is a viable development model for it. (Same would apply for kGraft > > automation.) > > Why? We (IMHO incorrectly) used the argument of tight coupling to put > perf into the kernel tree. Generating kernel live patches is way more > integrated that it absolutely has to go into the tree to be able to do > proper development on it in an integrated fashion. I agree that we should also put kpatch-build (or some converged kpatch/kGraft-build tool) into the kernel tree, because of the tight interdependencies between it and the kernel. I think it would make development much easier. Otherwise, for example, it may end up having a lot of #ifdef hacks based on what kernel version it's targeting. -- Josh -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/