On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 12:35:04AM -0600, Chris Friesen wrote: > In the telecom space it's quite common to want to modify multiple > running binaries with as little downtime as possible.
OK > (Beyond a threshold it becomes FCC-reportable in the US, and > everyone wants to avoid that...) That's beside the point. > Our old proprietary OS had explicit support for replacing running > binary code on the fly, so customers have gotten used to the > ability. Now they want equivalent functionality with our > linux-based stuff. *Why* do they need this is what I asked. A sensible real world example would be useful. > For general application support I suspect some kernel support will > be required. Whether this is the way to go or whether it can be > done using existing mechanisms, I'm not knowledgeable enough to > comment. I used to work in telco space, we had some such systems and similar things. Some from Nortel even. None of the things I saw did anything that I can image really need a complicated kernel patch for. In fact, I'm not convinced *any* of these uses really needed live-patching at all. I would just like some examples of real-world needs and an explanation of why it's needed. Not handy-waving. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
