Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261500AbVDRGse (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Apr 2005 02:48:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261801AbVDRGse (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Apr 2005 02:48:34 -0400 Received: from ylpvm29-ext.prodigy.net ([207.115.57.60]:1239 "EHLO ylpvm29.prodigy.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261500AbVDRGsc (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Apr 2005 02:48:32 -0400 X-ORBL: [67.124.119.21] Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 23:48:10 -0700 From: Chris Wedgwood To: Chris Friesen Cc: Takashi Ikebe , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH x86_64] Live Patching Function on 2.6.11.7 Message-ID: <20050418064810.GD32315@taniwha.stupidest.org> References: <4263275A.2020405@lab.ntt.co.jp> <20050418040718.GA31163@taniwha.stupidest.org> <4263356D.9080007@lab.ntt.co.jp> <20050418061221.GA32315@taniwha.stupidest.org> <42635518.6040704@nortel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <42635518.6040704@nortel.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1476 Lines: 43 On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 12:35:04AM -0600, Chris Friesen wrote: > In the telecom space it's quite common to want to modify multiple > running binaries with as little downtime as possible. OK > (Beyond a threshold it becomes FCC-reportable in the US, and > everyone wants to avoid that...) That's beside the point. > Our old proprietary OS had explicit support for replacing running > binary code on the fly, so customers have gotten used to the > ability. Now they want equivalent functionality with our > linux-based stuff. *Why* do they need this is what I asked. A sensible real world example would be useful. > For general application support I suspect some kernel support will > be required. Whether this is the way to go or whether it can be > done using existing mechanisms, I'm not knowledgeable enough to > comment. I used to work in telco space, we had some such systems and similar things. Some from Nortel even. None of the things I saw did anything that I can image really need a complicated kernel patch for. In fact, I'm not convinced *any* of these uses really needed live-patching at all. I would just like some examples of real-world needs and an explanation of why it's needed. Not handy-waving. - 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/