On 17.08.2018 17:53, Petr Mladek wrote:
On Fri 2018-08-17 13:17:27, Evgenii Shatokhin wrote:
Hi,
On 07.03.2018 11:20, Petr Mladek wrote:
The atomic replace allows to create cumulative patches. They
are useful when you maintain many livepatches and want to remove
one that is lower on the
On 17.08.2018 17:53, Petr Mladek wrote:
On Fri 2018-08-17 13:17:27, Evgenii Shatokhin wrote:
Hi,
On 07.03.2018 11:20, Petr Mladek wrote:
The atomic replace allows to create cumulative patches. They
are useful when you maintain many livepatches and want to remove
one that is lower on the
On Fri 2018-08-17 13:17:27, Evgenii Shatokhin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 07.03.2018 11:20, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > The atomic replace allows to create cumulative patches. They
> > are useful when you maintain many livepatches and want to remove
> > one that is lower on the stack. In addition it is very
On Fri 2018-08-17 13:17:27, Evgenii Shatokhin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 07.03.2018 11:20, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > The atomic replace allows to create cumulative patches. They
> > are useful when you maintain many livepatches and want to remove
> > one that is lower on the stack. In addition it is very
Hi,
On 07.03.2018 11:20, Petr Mladek wrote:
The atomic replace allows to create cumulative patches. They
are useful when you maintain many livepatches and want to remove
one that is lower on the stack. In addition it is very useful when
more patches touch the same function and there are
Hi,
On 07.03.2018 11:20, Petr Mladek wrote:
The atomic replace allows to create cumulative patches. They
are useful when you maintain many livepatches and want to remove
one that is lower on the stack. In addition it is very useful when
more patches touch the same function and there are
On Mon 2018-03-26 14:12:03, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> On 03/26/2018 06:56 AM, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > On Mon 2018-03-12 14:57:04, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> >> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/livepatch-test
> >> b/tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/livepatch-test
> >> new file mode 100755
>
On Mon 2018-03-26 14:12:03, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> On 03/26/2018 06:56 AM, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > On Mon 2018-03-12 14:57:04, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> >> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/livepatch-test
> >> b/tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/livepatch-test
> >> new file mode 100755
>
On 03/26/2018 06:56 AM, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Mon 2018-03-12 14:57:04, Joe Lawrence wrote:
>> Hi Petr,
>>
>> These are the callback tests that I hacked up into a livepatch
>> kselftest. (Basically I copied a bunch of the sample modules and
>> verified the expected dmesg output as I had listed
On 03/26/2018 06:56 AM, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Mon 2018-03-12 14:57:04, Joe Lawrence wrote:
>> Hi Petr,
>>
>> These are the callback tests that I hacked up into a livepatch
>> kselftest. (Basically I copied a bunch of the sample modules and
>> verified the expected dmesg output as I had listed
On Mon 2018-03-12 14:57:04, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> Hi Petr,
>
> These are the callback tests that I hacked up into a livepatch
> kselftest. (Basically I copied a bunch of the sample modules and
> verified the expected dmesg output as I had listed in in the
> Documentation/livepatch/callbacks.txt
On Mon 2018-03-12 14:57:04, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> Hi Petr,
>
> These are the callback tests that I hacked up into a livepatch
> kselftest. (Basically I copied a bunch of the sample modules and
> verified the expected dmesg output as I had listed in in the
> Documentation/livepatch/callbacks.txt
On Mon, 12 Mar 2018, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> These are the callback tests that I hacked up into a livepatch
> kselftest. (Basically I copied a bunch of the sample modules and
> verified the expected dmesg output as I had listed in in the
> Documentation/livepatch/callbacks.txt file.) The script
On Mon, 12 Mar 2018, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> These are the callback tests that I hacked up into a livepatch
> kselftest. (Basically I copied a bunch of the sample modules and
> verified the expected dmesg output as I had listed in in the
> Documentation/livepatch/callbacks.txt file.) The script
Hi Petr,
These are the callback tests that I hacked up into a livepatch
kselftest. (Basically I copied a bunch of the sample modules and
verified the expected dmesg output as I had listed in in the
Documentation/livepatch/callbacks.txt file.) The script is still a
little rough and maybe this
Hi Petr,
These are the callback tests that I hacked up into a livepatch
kselftest. (Basically I copied a bunch of the sample modules and
verified the expected dmesg output as I had listed in in the
Documentation/livepatch/callbacks.txt file.) The script is still a
little rough and maybe this
On 03/08/2018 10:01 AM, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Wed 2018-03-07 16:55:53, Joe Lawrence wrote:
>> Running against v10, callbacks seem to be good up until I disable an
>> atomic replace patch. My understanding is that the original patch's
>> unpatch callbacks should be skipped (as they were). I was
On 03/08/2018 10:01 AM, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Wed 2018-03-07 16:55:53, Joe Lawrence wrote:
>> Running against v10, callbacks seem to be good up until I disable an
>> atomic replace patch. My understanding is that the original patch's
>> unpatch callbacks should be skipped (as they were). I was
On Wed 2018-03-07 16:55:53, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> On 03/07/2018 03:20 AM, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > The atomic replace allows to create cumulative patches. They
> > are useful when you maintain many livepatches and want to remove
> > one that is lower on the stack. In addition it is very useful when
On Wed 2018-03-07 16:55:53, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> On 03/07/2018 03:20 AM, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > The atomic replace allows to create cumulative patches. They
> > are useful when you maintain many livepatches and want to remove
> > one that is lower on the stack. In addition it is very useful when
On 03/07/2018 03:20 AM, Petr Mladek wrote:
> The atomic replace allows to create cumulative patches. They
> are useful when you maintain many livepatches and want to remove
> one that is lower on the stack. In addition it is very useful when
> more patches touch the same function and there are
On 03/07/2018 03:20 AM, Petr Mladek wrote:
> The atomic replace allows to create cumulative patches. They
> are useful when you maintain many livepatches and want to remove
> one that is lower on the stack. In addition it is very useful when
> more patches touch the same function and there are
The atomic replace allows to create cumulative patches. They
are useful when you maintain many livepatches and want to remove
one that is lower on the stack. In addition it is very useful when
more patches touch the same function and there are dependencies
between them.
Changes against v9:
+
The atomic replace allows to create cumulative patches. They
are useful when you maintain many livepatches and want to remove
one that is lower on the stack. In addition it is very useful when
more patches touch the same function and there are dependencies
between them.
Changes against v9:
+
24 matches
Mail list logo
