Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752811AbdFMLAN (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jun 2017 07:00:13 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:48122 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752081AbdFMLAM (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jun 2017 07:00:12 -0400 Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 13:00:09 +0200 (CEST) From: Miroslav Benes To: Joe Lawrence cc: live-patching@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Josh Poimboeuf , Jessica Yu , Jiri Kosina , Petr Mladek Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] livepatch: add shadow variable sample program In-Reply-To: <1496341526-19061-4-git-send-email-joe.lawrence@redhat.com> Message-ID: References: <1496341526-19061-1-git-send-email-joe.lawrence@redhat.com> <1496341526-19061-4-git-send-email-joe.lawrence@redhat.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (LSU 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 568 Lines: 18 On Thu, 1 Jun 2017, Joe Lawrence wrote: > Modify the sample livepatch to demonstrate the shadow variable API. > > Signed-off-by: Joe Lawrence > --- > samples/livepatch/livepatch-sample.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > 1 file changed, 38 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) Would it make sense to make this our second sample module? I think we should keep one as simple as possible, and illustrate new features in separate sample modules. I'd like to have another one for klp-convert patch set too. What do you think? Miroslav