[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141107123154.GA4071@treble.redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2014 06:31:54 -0600
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
To: Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@...e.cz>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Seth Jennings <sjenning@...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 09:24:23PM +0100, Vojtech Pavlik wrote:
> 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.
> > >
> > > 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.
>
> One reason is that there are currently at least two generators using
> very different methods of generation (in addition to the option of doing
> the patch module by hand), and neither of them are currently in a state
> where they would be ready for inclusion into the kernel (although the
> kpatch one is clearly closer to that).
What generator does kGraft have? Is that the one that generates the
source patch, or is there one that generates a binary patch module?
--
Josh
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists