archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Josh Poimboeuf <>
To: Joe Lawrence <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] docs/livepatch: Add new compiler considerations doc
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 15:51:39 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200722205139.hwbej2atk2ejq27n@treble> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 01:03:03PM -0400, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> On 7/21/20 7:04 PM, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 12:14:06PM -0400, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> > > Compiler optimizations can have serious implications on livepatching.
> > > Create a document that outlines common optimization patterns and safe
> > > ways to livepatch them.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Joe Lawrence <>
> > 
> > There's a lot of good info here, but I wonder if it should be
> > reorganized a bit and instead called "how to create a livepatch module",
> > because that's really the point of it all.
> > 
> That would be nice.  Would you consider a stand-alone compiler-optimizations
> doc an incremental step towards that end?  Note that the other files
> (callbacks, shadow-vars, system-state) in their current form might be as
> confusing to the newbie.

It's an incremental step towards _something_.  Whether that's a cohesive
patch creation guide, or just a growing hodgepodge of random documents,
it may be too early to say :-)

> > I'm thinking a newcomer reading this might be lost.  It's not
> > necessarily clear that there are currently two completely different
> > approaches to creating a livepatch module, each with their own quirks
> > and benefits/drawbacks.  There is one mention of a "source-based
> > livepatch author" but no explanation of what that means.
> > 
> Yes, the initial draft was light on source-based patching since I only
> really tinker with it for samples/kselftests.  The doc was the result of an
> experienced livepatch developer and Sunday afternoon w/the compiler. I'm
> sure it reads as such. :)

Are experienced livepatch developers the intended audience?  If so I
question what value this document has in its current form.  Presumably
experienced livepatch developers would already know this stuff.

> > Maybe it could begin with an overview of the two approaches, and then
> > delve more into the details of each approach, and then delve even more
> > into the gory details about compiler optimizations.
> > 
> Up until now, the livepatch documentation has danced around the particular
> creation method and only described the API in abstract.  If a compiler
> considerations doc needs to have that complete context then I'd suggest we
> reorganize the entire lot as a prerequisite.

I wouldn't say it *needs* to have that context.  But it would be a lot
more useful with it.  As you pointed out, the existing documents do need
to be reorganized into a more cohesive whole.


  reply	other threads:[~2020-07-22 20:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-07-21 16:14 [PATCH 0/2] livepatch: Add compiler optimization disclaimer/docs Joe Lawrence
2020-07-21 16:14 ` [PATCH 1/2] docs/livepatch: Add new compiler considerations doc Joe Lawrence
2020-07-21 23:04   ` Josh Poimboeuf
2020-07-22 17:03     ` Joe Lawrence
2020-07-22 20:51       ` Josh Poimboeuf [this message]
2020-08-06 12:03         ` Petr Mladek
2020-08-10 19:46           ` refactoring livepatch documentation was " Joe Lawrence
2020-09-01 17:12             ` Josh Poimboeuf
2020-09-02 14:00             ` Miroslav Benes
2020-09-02 13:45   ` Miroslav Benes
2020-07-21 16:14 ` [PATCH 2/2] samples/livepatch: Add README.rst disclaimer Joe Lawrence
2020-08-06 12:07   ` Petr Mladek
2020-09-02 13:46   ` Miroslav Benes

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20200722205139.hwbej2atk2ejq27n@treble \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).