Re: [PATCH 0/2] Kernel Live Patching

From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To: Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@suse.cz>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Seth Jennings <sjenning@redhat.com>,
	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	live-patching@vger.kernel.org, kpatch@redhat.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Kernel Live Patching
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2014 06:31:54 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141107123154.GA4071@treble.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141106202423.GB2266@suse.cz>

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