Re: livepatch: Implement separate coming and going module notifiers

2016-02-01 Thread Josh Poimboeuf
On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 05:58:29PM -0500, Jessica Yu wrote: > +++ Josh Poimboeuf [29/01/16 13:42 -0600]: > >On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 08:25:15PM +0100, Miroslav Benes wrote: > >>On Fri, 29 Jan 2016, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > >> > >>> On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 12:40:14PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > >>>

Re: livepatch: Implement separate coming and going module notifiers

2016-01-29 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Fri, 29 Jan 2016 17:58:29 -0500 Jessica Yu wrote: > diff --git a/kernel/module.c b/kernel/module.c > index 8358f46..eccd289 100644 > --- a/kernel/module.c > +++ b/kernel/module.c > @@ -979,8 +979,12 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(delete_module, const char __user *, > name_user, > /* Final destructi

Re: livepatch: Implement separate coming and going module notifiers

2016-01-29 Thread Jessica Yu
+++ Josh Poimboeuf [29/01/16 13:42 -0600]: On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 08:25:15PM +0100, Miroslav Benes wrote: On Fri, 29 Jan 2016, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 12:40:14PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > [ Added Rusty, as he's still maintainer of the module code ] > > > > On Fri

Re: livepatch: Implement separate coming and going module notifiers

2016-01-29 Thread Josh Poimboeuf
On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 03:04:51PM -0500, Jessica Yu wrote: > +++ Josh Poimboeuf [29/01/16 11:30 -0600]: > >On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 05:30:46PM +0100, Miroslav Benes wrote: > >>Otherwise than that it looks good. I agree there are advantages to split > >>the notifiers. For example we can replace the

Re: livepatch: Implement separate coming and going module notifiers

2016-01-29 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Fri, 29 Jan 2016 15:09:31 -0500 Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Fri, 29 Jan 2016 15:04:51 -0500 > Jessica Yu wrote: > > > >diff --git a/kernel/module.c b/kernel/module.c > > >index 8358f46..aeabd81 100644 > > >--- a/kernel/module.c > > >+++ b/kernel/module.c > > >@@ -3371,6 +3371,13 @@ static int

Re: livepatch: Implement separate coming and going module notifiers

2016-01-29 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Fri, 29 Jan 2016 15:04:51 -0500 Jessica Yu wrote: > >diff --git a/kernel/module.c b/kernel/module.c > >index 8358f46..aeabd81 100644 > >--- a/kernel/module.c > >+++ b/kernel/module.c > >@@ -3371,6 +3371,13 @@ static int complete_formation(struct module *mod, > >struct load_info *info) > >

Re: livepatch: Implement separate coming and going module notifiers

2016-01-29 Thread Jessica Yu
+++ Josh Poimboeuf [29/01/16 11:30 -0600]: On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 05:30:46PM +0100, Miroslav Benes wrote: Otherwise than that it looks good. I agree there are advantages to split the notifiers. For example we can replace the coming one with the function call somewhere in load_module() to improv

Re: livepatch: Implement separate coming and going module notifiers

2016-01-29 Thread Jessica Yu
+++ Steven Rostedt [29/01/16 14:29 -0500]: On Fri, 29 Jan 2016 20:25:15 +0100 (CET) Miroslav Benes wrote: It is possible to achieve the same goal even with the notifiers. They are processed synchronously in complete_formation(). So we can put our klp hook after that, right? Or better, put it t