From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ua0-x244.google.com (mail-ua0-x244.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c08::244]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3yRTT86mcLzDr4J for ; Wed, 1 Nov 2017 11:23:08 +1100 (AEDT) Received: by mail-ua0-x244.google.com with SMTP id s41so499707uab.10 for ; Tue, 31 Oct 2017 17:23:08 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20171031183959.GA4313@lst.de> References: <1508217523-18885-1-git-send-email-kamalesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20171031141959.7pqnlncg2236yqqg@naverao1-tp.localdomain> <20171031153004.GA31864@lst.de> <20171031162316.zerlu7ijb3qem33v@naverao1-tp.localdomain> <20171031183959.GA4313@lst.de> From: Balbir Singh Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2017 11:23:05 +1100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] kernel/module_64.c: Add REL24 relocation support of livepatch symbols To: Torsten Duwe Cc: "Naveen N . Rao" , Kamalesh Babulal , Michael Ellerman , Josh Poimboeuf , Jessica Yu , Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli , Aravinda Prasad , "open list:LINUX FOR POWERPC (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" , live-patching@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 5:39 AM, Torsten Duwe wrote: > On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 09:53:16PM +0530, Naveen N . Rao wrote: >> On 2017/10/31 03:30PM, Torsten Duwe wrote: >> > >> > Maybe I failed to express my views properly; I find the whole approach > [...] >> > NAK'd-by: Torsten Duwe >> >> Hmm... that wasn't evident at all given Balbir's reponse to your >> previous concerns and your lack of response for the same: >> https://www.mail-archive.com/linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org/msg125350.html > > To me it was obvious that the root cause was kpatch's current inability to > deal with ppc calling conventions when copying binary functions. Hence my > hint at the discussion about a possible source-level solution that would > work nicely for all architectures. Alternatives are good, at this point kpatch is important and should be supported. Source level alternatives are not controlled by us, but by distros and tooling. I don't think the NAK helps, it only states that kpatch should not be enabled for ppc64 as it needs a new stub. I know SuSE does not use kpatch, but we would want to be able to support tools across distros. When we get a source level patch tool going, I'd love to have it and have use it by default and we can revisit the usefulness of this stub at that point and deprecate if required. Balbir Singh.