Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-169248-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3731.500.231\))
Subject: Re: [PATCH] livepatch.h: Add comment to klp transition state
From: zhang warden <zhangwarden@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20240505210024.2veie34wkbwkqggl@treble>
Date: Mon, 6 May 2024 10:04:26 +0800
Cc: mbenes@suse.cz,
 jikos@kernel.org,
 pmladek@suse.com,
 joe.lawrence@redhat.com,
 live-patching@vger.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <F3E94528-EA85-4A15-8452-EA2DE20EEB88@gmail.com>
References: <20240429072628.23841-1-zhangwarden@gmail.com>
 <20240505210024.2veie34wkbwkqggl@treble>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>


> On May 6, 2024, at 05:00, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org> wrote:
>=20
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 03:26:28PM +0800, zhangwarden@gmail.com wrote:
>> From: Wardenjohn <zhangwarden@gmail.com>
>>=20
>> livepatch.h use KLP_UNDEFINED\KLP_UNPATCHED\KLP_PATCHED for klp =
transition state.
>> When livepatch is ready but idle, using KLP_UNDEFINED seems very =
confusing.
>> In order not to introduce potential risks to kernel, just update =
comment
>> to these state.
>> ---
>> include/linux/livepatch.h | 6 +++---
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>=20
>> diff --git a/include/linux/livepatch.h b/include/linux/livepatch.h
>> index 9b9b38e89563..b6a214f2f8e3 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/livepatch.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/livepatch.h
>> @@ -18,9 +18,9 @@
>> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_LIVEPATCH)
>>=20
>> /* task patch states */
>> -#define KLP_UNDEFINED -1
>> -#define KLP_UNPATCHED  0
>> -#define KLP_PATCHED  1
>> +#define KLP_UNDEFINED -1 /* idle, no transition in progress */
>> +#define KLP_UNPATCHED  0 /* transitioning to unpatched state */
>> +#define KLP_PATCHED  1 /* transitioning to patched state */
>=20
> Instead of the comments, how about we just rename them to
>=20
>  KLP_TRANSITION_IDLE
>  KLP_TRANSITION_UNPATCHED
>  KLP_TRANSITION_PATCHED
>=20
> which shouldn't break userspace AFAIK.
>=20
> --=20
> Josh

Hi Josh!

Renaming them may be a better way as my previous patch. I would like to =
know why renaming KLP_*** into=20
KLP_TRANSITION_*** will not break userspace while=20
Renaming KLP_UNDEWFINED to KLP_IDLE would break the userspace.

Meanwhile, I will resubmit another patch renaming the macros as your =
suggestion ASAP. Thank ~~ :)

--
Wardenjohn