From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752948AbbKJNkU (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Nov 2015 08:40:20 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:37421 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752551AbbKJNkR (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Nov 2015 08:40:17 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 07:40:14 -0600 From: Josh Poimboeuf To: Miroslav Benes Cc: Chris J Arges , live-patching@vger.kernel.org, jeyu@redhat.com, Seth Jennings , Jiri Kosina , Vojtech Pavlik , linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] livepatch: old_name,number scheme in livepatch sysfs directory Message-ID: <20151110134014.GA3163@treble.redhat.com> References: <20151105155656.GD28254@treble.redhat.com> <1447085770-11729-1-git-send-email-chris.j.arges@canonical.com> <20151109205608.GC3914@treble.redhat.com> <564125BE.2090604@canonical.com> <20151110045434.GB18117@treble.hsd1.ky.comcast.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23.1-rc1 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 09:49:09AM +0100, Miroslav Benes wrote: > On Mon, 9 Nov 2015, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 05:01:18PM -0600, Chris J Arges wrote: > > > On 11/09/2015 02:56 PM, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > > > > I'd recommend splitting this up into two separate patches: > > > > > > > > 1. introduce old_sympos > > > > 2. change the sysfs interface > > > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 10:16:05AM -0600, Chris J Arges wrote: > > > >> In cases of duplicate symbols in vmlinux, old_sympos will be used to > > > >> disambiguate instead of old_addr. Normally old_sympos will be 0, and > > > >> default to only returning the first found instance of that symbol. If an > > > >> incorrect symbol position is specified then livepatching will fail. > > > > > > > > In the case of old_sympos == 0, instead of just returning the first > > > > symbol it finds, I think it should ensure that the symbol is unique. As > > > > Miroslav suggested: > > > > > > > > 0 - default, preserve more or less current behaviour. If the symbol is > > > > unique there is no problem. If it is not the patching would fail. > > > > 1, 2, ... - occurrence of the symbol in kallsyms. > > > > > > > > The advantage is that if the user does not care and is certain that the > > > > symbol is unique he doesn't have to do anything. If the symbol is not > > > > unique he still has means how to solve it. > > > > > > > > > > So one part that will be confusing here is as follows. > > > > > > If '0' is specified for old_sympos, should the symbol be 'func_name,0' > > > or 'func_name,1' provided we have a unique symbol? We could also default > > > to 'what the user provides', but this seems odd. > > > > I don't feel strongly either way, but I think using the same number the > > user provides is fine, since it makes the sysfs interface consistent > > with the old_sympos usage. > > I think it should be func_name,1 even if '0' is specified and the symbol > is unique. Because if we say that 1, 2, ... is the occurrence of the > symbol in kallsyms it should stay that way everywhere. Hence for > old_sympos == 0 it is func_name,1 in sysfs; for 1 it is still func_name,1; > for 2 it is func_name,2 and so on. > > And I'd add this to sysfs documentation. That makes sense, sounds fine to me. -- Josh From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Josh Poimboeuf Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] livepatch: old_name,number scheme in livepatch sysfs directory Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 07:40:14 -0600 Message-ID: <20151110134014.GA3163@treble.redhat.com> References: <20151105155656.GD28254@treble.redhat.com> <1447085770-11729-1-git-send-email-chris.j.arges@canonical.com> <20151109205608.GC3914@treble.redhat.com> <564125BE.2090604@canonical.com> <20151110045434.GB18117@treble.hsd1.ky.comcast.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Miroslav Benes Cc: Chris J Arges , live-patching-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, jeyu-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, Seth Jennings , Jiri Kosina , Vojtech Pavlik , linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 09:49:09AM +0100, Miroslav Benes wrote: > On Mon, 9 Nov 2015, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 05:01:18PM -0600, Chris J Arges wrote: > > > On 11/09/2015 02:56 PM, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > > > > I'd recommend splitting this up into two separate patches: > > > > > > > > 1. introduce old_sympos > > > > 2. change the sysfs interface > > > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 10:16:05AM -0600, Chris J Arges wrote: > > > >> In cases of duplicate symbols in vmlinux, old_sympos will be used to > > > >> disambiguate instead of old_addr. Normally old_sympos will be 0, and > > > >> default to only returning the first found instance of that symbol. If an > > > >> incorrect symbol position is specified then livepatching will fail. > > > > > > > > In the case of old_sympos == 0, instead of just returning the first > > > > symbol it finds, I think it should ensure that the symbol is unique. As > > > > Miroslav suggested: > > > > > > > > 0 - default, preserve more or less current behaviour. If the symbol is > > > > unique there is no problem. If it is not the patching would fail. > > > > 1, 2, ... - occurrence of the symbol in kallsyms. > > > > > > > > The advantage is that if the user does not care and is certain that the > > > > symbol is unique he doesn't have to do anything. If the symbol is not > > > > unique he still has means how to solve it. > > > > > > > > > > So one part that will be confusing here is as follows. > > > > > > If '0' is specified for old_sympos, should the symbol be 'func_name,0' > > > or 'func_name,1' provided we have a unique symbol? We could also default > > > to 'what the user provides', but this seems odd. > > > > I don't feel strongly either way, but I think using the same number the > > user provides is fine, since it makes the sysfs interface consistent > > with the old_sympos usage. > > I think it should be func_name,1 even if '0' is specified and the symbol > is unique. Because if we say that 1, 2, ... is the occurrence of the > symbol in kallsyms it should stay that way everywhere. Hence for > old_sympos == 0 it is func_name,1 in sysfs; for 1 it is still func_name,1; > for 2 it is func_name,2 and so on. > > And I'd add this to sysfs documentation. That makes sense, sounds fine to me. -- Josh