linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] Kernel Live Patching

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20141106185857.GA7106@infradead.org>
Date:	Thu, 6 Nov 2014 10:58:57 -0800
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@...e.cz>
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Seth Jennings <sjenning@...hat.com>,
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	live-patching@...r.kernel.org, kpatch@...hat.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Kernel Live Patching

On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 07:51:57PM +0100, Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
> I don't think this specific example was generated. 
> 
> 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.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/