linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>,
	Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com>,
	Nicolai Stange <nstange@suse.de>,
	live-patching@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [POC 0/7] livepatch: Make livepatch states, callbacks, and shadow variables work together
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2023 13:33:17 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231110213317.g4wz3j3flj7u2qg2@treble> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231110170428.6664-1-pmladek@suse.com>

On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 06:04:21PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> This POC is a material for the discussion "Simplify Livepatch Callbacks,
> Shadow Variables, and States handling" at LPC 2013, see
> https://lpc.events/event/17/contributions/1541/
> 
> It obsoletes the patchset adding the garbage collection of shadow
> variables. This new solution is based on ideas from Nicolai Stange.
> And it should also be in sync with Josh's ideas mentioned into
> the thread about the garbage collection, see
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230204235910.4j4ame5ntqogqi7m@treble

Nice!  I like how it brings the "features" together and makes them easy
to use.  This looks like a vast improvement.

Was there a reason to change the naming?  I'm thinking

  setup / enable / disable / release

is less precise than

  pre_patch / post_patch / pre_unpatch / post_unpatch.

Also, I'm thinking "replaced" instead of "obsolete" would be more
consistent with the existing terminology.

For example, in __klp_enable_patch():

	ret = klp_setup_states(patch);
	if (ret)
		goto err;

	if (patch->replace)
		klp_disable_obsolete_states(patch);

it's not immediately clear why "disable obsolete" would be the "replace"
counterpart to "setup".

Similarly, in klp_complete_transition():

	if (klp_transition_patch->replace && klp_target_state == KLP_PATCHED) {
		klp_unpatch_replaced_patches(klp_transition_patch);
		klp_discard_nops(klp_transition_patch);
		klp_release_obsolete_states(klp_transition_patch);
	}

it's a little jarring to have "unpatch replaced" followed by "release
obsolete".

So instead of:

  int  klp_setup_states(struct klp_patch *patch);
  void klp_enable_states(struct klp_patch *patch);
  void klp_disable_states(struct klp_patch *patch);
  void klp_release_states(struct klp_patch *patch);

  void klp_enable_obsolete_states(struct klp_patch *patch);
  void klp_disable_obsolete_states(struct klp_patch *patch);
  void klp_release_obsolete_states(struct klp_patch *patch);

how about something like:

  int  klp_states_pre_patch(void);
  void klp_states_post_patch(void);
  void klp_states_pre_unpatch(void);
  void klp_states_post_unpatch(void);

  void klp_states_post_patch_replaced(void);
  void klp_states_pre_unpatch_replaced(void);
  void klp_states_post_unpatch_replaced(void);

?

(note that passing klp_transition_patch might be optional since state.c
already has visibility to it anyway)

-- 
Josh

      parent reply	other threads:[~2023-11-10 21:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-11-10 17:04 [POC 0/7] livepatch: Make livepatch states, callbacks, and shadow variables work together Petr Mladek
2023-11-10 17:04 ` [POC 1/7] livepatch: Add callbacks for introducing and removing states Petr Mladek
2023-11-11  0:54   ` kernel test robot
2023-11-11  3:19   ` kernel test robot
2023-11-10 17:04 ` [POC 2/7] livepatch: Allow to handle lifetime of shadow variables using the livepatch state Petr Mladek
2023-11-10 17:04 ` [POC 3/7] livepatch: Use per-state callbacks in state API tests Petr Mladek
2023-11-10 17:04 ` [POC 4/7] livepatch: Do not use callbacks when testing sysfs interface Petr Mladek
2023-11-10 17:04 ` [POC 5/7] livepatch: Convert klp module callbacks tests into livepatch module tests Petr Mladek
2023-11-11  1:15   ` kernel test robot
2023-11-10 17:04 ` [POC 6/7] livepatch: Remove the obsolete per-object callbacks Petr Mladek
2023-11-10 17:04 ` [POC 7/7] livepatching: Remove per-state version Petr Mladek
2023-11-10 21:33 ` Josh Poimboeuf [this message]

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:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

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

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20231110213317.g4wz3j3flj7u2qg2@treble \
    --to=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
    --cc=joe.lawrence@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=live-patching@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mbenes@suse.cz \
    --cc=nstange@suse.de \
    --cc=pmladek@suse.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* 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).