From: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>
To: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc: Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com>,
Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com>,
Jessica Yu <jeyu@kernel.org>,
Evgenii Shatokhin <eshatokhin@virtuozzo.com>,
live-patching@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 10/12] livepatch: Atomic replace and cumulative patches documentation
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2018 17:15:50 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.21.1809041709570.3194@pobox.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180828143603.4442-11-pmladek@suse.com>
On Tue, 28 Aug 2018, Petr Mladek wrote:
> User documentation for the atomic replace feature. It makes it easier
> to maintain livepatches using so-called cumulative patches.
I think the documentation should be updated due to API changes.
> Signed-off-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
> ---
> Documentation/livepatch/cumulative-patches.txt | 105 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 105 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 Documentation/livepatch/cumulative-patches.txt
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/livepatch/cumulative-patches.txt b/Documentation/livepatch/cumulative-patches.txt
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..206b7f98d270
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/livepatch/cumulative-patches.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,105 @@
> +===================================
> +Atomic Replace & Cumulative Patches
> +===================================
> +
> +There might be dependencies between livepatches. If multiple patches need
> +to do different changes to the same function(s) then we need to define
> +an order in which the patches will be installed. And function implementations
> +from any newer livepatch must be done on top of the older ones.
> +
> +This might become a maintenance nightmare. Especially if anyone would want
> +to remove a patch that is in the middle of the stack.
> +
> +An elegant solution comes with the feature called "Atomic Replace". It allows
> +to create so called "Cumulative Patches". They include all wanted changes
> +from all older livepatches and completely replace them in one transition.
> +
> +Usage
> +-----
> +
> +The atomic replace can be enabled by setting "replace" flag in struct klp_patch,
> +for example:
> +
> + static struct klp_patch patch = {
> + .mod = THIS_MODULE,
> + .objs = objs,
> + .replace = true,
> + };
> +
> +Such a patch is added on top of the livepatch stack when registered. It can
> +be enabled even when some earlier patches have not been enabled yet.
Here.
> +All processes are then migrated to use the code only from the new patch.
> +Once the transition is finished, all older patches are removed from the stack
> +of patches. Even the older not-enabled patches mentioned above. They can
> +even be unregistered and the related modules unloaded.
Here.
> +Ftrace handlers are transparently removed from functions that are no
> +longer modified by the new cumulative patch.
> +
> +As a result, the livepatch authors might maintain sources only for one
> +cumulative patch. It helps to keep the patch consistent while adding or
> +removing various fixes or features.
> +
> +Users could keep only the last patch installed on the system after
> +the transition to has finished. It helps to clearly see what code is
> +actually in use. Also the livepatch might then be seen as a "normal"
> +module that modifies the kernel behavior. The only difference is that
> +it can be updated at runtime without breaking its functionality.
> +
> +
> +Features
> +--------
> +
> +The atomic replace allows:
> +
> + + Atomically revert some functions in a previous patch while
> + upgrading other functions.
> +
> + + Remove eventual performance impact caused by core redirection
> + for functions that are no longer patched.
> +
> + + Decrease user confusion about stacking order and what patches are
> + currently in effect.
> +
> +
> +Limitations:
> +------------
> +
> + + Replaced patches can no longer be enabled. But if the transition
> + to the cumulative patch was not forced, the kernel modules with
> + the older livepatches can be removed and eventually added again.
I'd rewrite even this.
> + A good practice is to set .replace flag in any released livepatch.
> + Then re-adding an older livepatch is equivalent to downgrading
> + to that patch. This is safe as long as the livepatches do _not_ do
> + extra modifications in (un)patching callbacks or in the module_init()
> + or module_exit() functions, see below.
> +
> +
> + + Only the (un)patching callbacks from the _new_ cumulative livepatch are
> + executed. Any callbacks from the replaced patches are ignored.
> +
> + By other words, the cumulative patch is responsible for doing any actions
> + that are necessary to properly replace any older patch.
s/By other words/In other words/
> + As a result, it might be dangerous to replace newer cumulative patches by
> + older ones. The old livepatches might not provide the necessary callbacks.
> +
> + This might be seen as a limitation in some scenarios. But it makes the life
> + easier in many others. Only the new cumulative livepatch knows what
> + fixes/features are added/removed and what special actions are necessary
> + for a smooth transition.
> +
> + In each case, it would be a nightmare to think about the order of
> + the various callbacks and their interactions if the callbacks from all
> + enabled patches were called.
s/In each case/In any case/ ?
> + + There is no special handling of shadow variables. Livepatch authors
> + must create their own rules how to pass them from one cumulative
> + patch to the other. Especially they should not blindly remove them
> + in module_exit() functions.
> +
> + A good practice might be to remove shadow variables in the post-unpatch
> + callback. It is called only when the livepatch is properly disabled.
Miroslav
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-04 15:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-28 14:35 [PATCH v12 00/12] Petr Mladek
2018-08-28 14:35 ` [PATCH v12 01/12] livepatch: Change void *new_func -> unsigned long new_addr in struct klp_func Petr Mladek
2018-08-31 8:37 ` Miroslav Benes
2018-08-28 14:35 ` [PATCH v12 02/12] livepatch: Helper macros to define livepatch structures Petr Mladek
2018-08-28 14:35 ` [PATCH v12 03/12] livepatch: Shuffle klp_enable_patch()/klp_disable_patch() code Petr Mladek
2018-08-31 8:38 ` Miroslav Benes
2018-08-28 14:35 ` [PATCH v12 04/12] livepatch: Consolidate klp_free functions Petr Mladek
2018-08-31 10:39 ` Miroslav Benes
2018-10-12 11:43 ` Petr Mladek
2018-08-28 14:35 ` [PATCH v12 05/12] livepatch: Refuse to unload only livepatches available during a forced transition Petr Mladek
2018-08-28 14:35 ` [PATCH v12 06/12] livepatch: Simplify API by removing registration step Petr Mladek
2018-09-05 9:34 ` Miroslav Benes
2018-10-12 13:01 ` Petr Mladek
2018-10-15 16:01 ` Miroslav Benes
2018-10-18 14:54 ` Petr Mladek
2018-10-18 15:30 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-10-19 12:16 ` Miroslav Benes
2018-10-19 14:36 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-10-22 13:25 ` Petr Mladek
2018-10-23 16:39 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-10-24 2:55 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-10-24 11:14 ` Petr Mladek
2018-08-28 14:35 ` [PATCH v12 07/12] livepatch: Use lists to manage patches, objects and functions Petr Mladek
2018-09-03 16:00 ` Miroslav Benes
2018-10-12 12:12 ` Petr Mladek
2018-08-28 14:35 ` [PATCH v12 08/12] livepatch: Add atomic replace Petr Mladek
2018-08-28 14:36 ` [PATCH v12 09/12] livepatch: Remove Nop structures when unused Petr Mladek
2018-09-04 14:50 ` Miroslav Benes
2018-08-28 14:36 ` [PATCH v12 10/12] livepatch: Atomic replace and cumulative patches documentation Petr Mladek
2018-09-04 15:15 ` Miroslav Benes [this message]
2018-08-28 14:36 ` [PATCH v12 11/12] livepatch: Remove ordering and refuse loading conflicting patches Petr Mladek
2018-08-28 14:36 ` [PATCH v12 12/12] selftests/livepatch: introduce tests Petr Mladek
2018-08-30 11:58 ` [PATCH v12 00/12] Miroslav Benes
2018-10-11 12:48 ` Petr Mladek
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=alpine.LSU.2.21.1809041709570.3194@pobox.suse.cz \
--to=mbenes@suse.cz \
--cc=eshatokhin@virtuozzo.com \
--cc=jbaron@akamai.com \
--cc=jeyu@kernel.org \
--cc=jikos@kernel.org \
--cc=joe.lawrence@redhat.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=live-patching@vger.kernel.org \
--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).