[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.20.1706012202490.26873@cbobk.fhfr.pm>
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2017 22:05:21 +0200 (CEST)
From: Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>
To: Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@...hat.com>
cc: live-patching@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Jessica Yu <jeyu@...hat.com>, Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] livepatch: add shadow variable API
On Thu, 1 Jun 2017, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> This patchset is a simplified livepatch port of kpatch's "shadow"
> variable API [1]. The kpatch project has successfully employed such
> shadow variables to implement patches that have extended data structure
> elements. This API provides livepatch a means of associating new,
> shadow data fields with existing data structures.
>
> See the first patch for the implementation, the second for further
> documentation (API, conccurency notes, use-case code snippets) and the
> third patch for an update to the sample livepatch module using shadow
> variables.
Thanks a lot for initiating this.
The only issue I've spotted so far -- is there any reason, why the API
completely ignores task_struct->patch_state, and always returns the 'new'
value?
This basically offloads the responsibility for deciding between old/new to
each and every caller, and that feels much more error prone compared to
having this automatically done by klp_shadow_get().
Thanks,
--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists