> On Dec 2, 2019, at 5:01 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.w...@oracle.com> > wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 02, 2019 at 03:55:04PM +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> On 02/12/2019 15:53, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: >>>>> I plan to release ack the patch in case the missing maintainer's acks >>>>> are not coming in too late. >>>> I think Andy's objection was that there has been zero testing of >>>> livepatching on gcc. Maybe we can find someone to do a smoke-test. >>> As in integrate livepatch-build tools in osstest smoke-tests? >>> Because the livepatch test cases are in osstest, unless something went awry? >> >> The sum total of livepatch testing in OSSTest is using the hand-coded >> ELF objects from the tests/ directory. >> >> This is perhaps ok for the basic mechanism, but its not representative >> of actually building real livepatches using livepatch build tools. > > True. But it tests the _hypervisor_ livepatch code. > > I am thinking that this discussion about "oh, but livepatch-build tools don't > work b/c" > is well <shrug> sucks but should never block an release as the core > livepatch functionality is OK.
I think a parallel is if Xen doesn’t build with a particular version of the compiler, or can’t build on a particular distro for some reason. We should certainly *try* to make things work with other projects, but if the issue is clearly with the other project, we shouldn’t have to block to wait for that other project to get things sorted out. -George _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xenemail@example.com https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel