lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Jan]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] livepatch: Revert "livepatch: enforce patch stacking semantics"
On 2015/1/21 22:36, Seth Jennings wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 03:06:38PM +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
>> On Wed, 21 Jan 2015, Li Bin wrote:
>>
>>> This reverts commit 83a90bb1345767f0cb96d242fd8b9db44b2b0e17.
>>>
>>> The method that only allowing the topmost patch on the stack to be
>>> enabled or disabled is unreasonable. Such as the following case:
>>>
>>> - do live patch1
>>> - disable patch1
>>> - do live patch2 //error
>>>
>>> Now, we will never be able to do new live patch unless disabing the
>>> patch1 although there is no dependencies.
>>
>> Unregistering disabled patch still works and removes it from the list no
>> matter the position.
>>
>> So what exactly is the problem?
>
>>From a quick glance, it seems that what this set does is it only
> enforces the stacking requirements if two patches patch the same
> function.
>

Yes, this patch is only concerning this case that 'multi patches patch
the same function' and solve the problem that mentioned previously:

foo_unpatched()
foo_patch1()
foo_patch2()
foo_patch3()
disable(foo_patch2)
disable(foo_patch3)
foo_patch1()

foo_patch2 is not allowed to be disabled before disable foo_patch3.

Thanks,
Li Bin

> I'm not sure if that is correct logically or correctly implemented by
> these patches yet.
>
> Seth
>
>>
>> --
>> Jiri Kosina
>> SUSE Labs
>
> .
>




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-01-22 02:01    [W:0.035 / U:0.452 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site