[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2019 09:19:00 -0400
From: Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@...hat.com>
To: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>
Cc: Joao Moreira <jmoreira@...e.de>, live-patching@...r.kernel.org,
pmladek@...e.cz, jikos@...e.cz, nstange@...e.de,
jpoimboe@...hat.com, khlebnikov@...dex-team.ru, jeyu@...nel.org,
matz@...e.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
michal.lkml@...kovi.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] klp-convert
On 4/4/19 7:49 AM, Miroslav Benes wrote:
>
>> BTW, something I *just* noticed when putting together that toy out-of-tree
>> module to test out multi-object livepatch modules is that we aren't
>> considering out-of-tree symbols in Symbols.list.
>>
>> Perhaps we can save that for v4 or beyond, but maybe we want to re-arrange the
>> klp-convert arguments to "klp-convert <input.ko> <out.ko> <Symbols.list>
>> [Symbols.list ...]" where we treat everything after <out.ko> as a symbol list
>> file? (This would assume we would generate a separate out-of-tree module
>> Symbols.list file.) /thinking-out-loud
>
> I understand it could help the testing quite a bit right now, but do we
> care about out-of-tree modules in general?
>
Yeah, this was only something I hit because I found it easier to
construct OOT modules to test and share with Joao.
I mentioned it because kpatch-build supports OOT and apparently some
folks are using it:
https://github.com/dynup/kpatch/pull/923
But like I said, we can push that off for another day for now.
-- Joe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists