lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Dec]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v14 00/11] livepatch: Atomic replace feature
From
Date
On 11/29/2018 04:44 AM, Petr Mladek wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have an updated present for your mailboxes.
>
> The atomic replace allows to create cumulative patches. They
> are useful when you maintain many livepatches and want to remove
> one that is lower on the stack. In addition it is very useful when
> more patches touch the same function and there are dependencies
> between them.
>
> All the changes were simple in principle but they required quite
> some refactoring again :-( IMHO, the biggest change is renaming
> klp_init_lists() ->klp_init_patch_before_free(). It does all
> init actions that need to succeed before klp_free() functions
> can be safely called. The main motivation was the need to
> initialize also the new .kobj_alive flags.
>
>
> Changes against v13:
>
> + Rename old_addr -> old_func instead of new_func -> new_addr. [Josh]
>
> + Do not add the helper macros to define structures. [Miroslav, Josh]
>
> + Add custom kobj_alive flag to reliably handle kobj state. [Miroslav]
>

Aside: I don't suppose that this could ever be folded into the kobject
code/data structure itself? This seems like a common problem that
kobj-users will need to solve like this.

> + Avoid renaming .forced flag to .module_put by calling klp_free
> functions only with taken module reference. [Josh]
>
> + Use list_add_tail() instead of list_add() when updating the dynamic
> lists of klp_object and klp_func structures. Note that this
> required also updating the order of messages from the pre/post
> callbacks in the selftest. [Josh, Miroslav]
>

Updated self-tests ran fine for me, thanks for updating.

> + Do not unnecessarily initialize ret variable in klp_add_nops(). [Miroslav]
>
> + Got rid of klp_discard_replaced_stuff(). [Josh]
>
> + Updated commit messages, comments and documentation, especially
> the section "Livepatch life-cycle" [Josh, Miroslav]

Thank you for adding/revising this part. It was pretty clear and it
helped to read this before going through the individual patches.

I don't have many code comments as the changes appear to safely and
correctly do what the say. (We are at v14 after all :) I mainly
compared the text and comments to the implementation and noted typos
(marked by substitution s/old/new) and awkward wordings (marked by
"re-wording suggestion"). That said, I ack'd each patch as I wouldn't
want these to hold up the patchset.

Thanks,

-- Joe




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-12-05 21:49    [W:0.183 / U:2.056 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site