From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Josh Poimboeuf Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 0/6] (mostly) Arch-independent livepatch Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 14:28:29 -0600 Message-ID: <20160208202829.GE23106@treble.redhat.com> References: <1454548271-24923-1-git-send-email-jeyu@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Miroslav Benes Cc: Jessica Yu , Rusty Russell , Seth Jennings , Jiri Kosina , Vojtech Pavlik , Jonathan Corbet , linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, live-patching-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, x86-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-s390-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-doc-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 03:54:22PM +0100, Miroslav Benes wrote: > On Wed, 3 Feb 2016, Jessica Yu wrote: > > > Jessica Yu (6): > > Elf: add livepatch-specific Elf constants > > module: preserve Elf information for livepatch modules > > module: s390: keep mod_arch_specific for livepatch modules > > livepatch: reuse module loader code to write relocations > > samples: livepatch: mark as livepatch module > > Documentation: livepatch: outline Elf format and requirements for > > patch modules > > Hi, > > I walked through the code and it looks good except for several minor > things in the fourth patch (livepatch: reuse module loader code to write > relocations). I'd propose to send the next version as a regular PATCH set > and not RFC. We can start collecting Reviews and Acks. Hopefully it won't > take more than one or two iterations. Would that be ok with everyone? Sounds good to me... -- Josh From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755944AbcBHU2d (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Feb 2016 15:28:33 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:35598 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753082AbcBHU2b (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Feb 2016 15:28:31 -0500 Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 14:28:29 -0600 From: Josh Poimboeuf To: Miroslav Benes Cc: Jessica Yu , Rusty Russell , Seth Jennings , Jiri Kosina , Vojtech Pavlik , Jonathan Corbet , linux-api@vger.kernel.org, live-patching@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 0/6] (mostly) Arch-independent livepatch Message-ID: <20160208202829.GE23106@treble.redhat.com> References: <1454548271-24923-1-git-send-email-jeyu@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23.1-rc1 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 03:54:22PM +0100, Miroslav Benes wrote: > On Wed, 3 Feb 2016, Jessica Yu wrote: > > > Jessica Yu (6): > > Elf: add livepatch-specific Elf constants > > module: preserve Elf information for livepatch modules > > module: s390: keep mod_arch_specific for livepatch modules > > livepatch: reuse module loader code to write relocations > > samples: livepatch: mark as livepatch module > > Documentation: livepatch: outline Elf format and requirements for > > patch modules > > Hi, > > I walked through the code and it looks good except for several minor > things in the fourth patch (livepatch: reuse module loader code to write > relocations). I'd propose to send the next version as a regular PATCH set > and not RFC. We can start collecting Reviews and Acks. Hopefully it won't > take more than one or two iterations. Would that be ok with everyone? Sounds good to me... -- Josh