Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1740637 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] livepatch: add transition notices

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] livepatch: add transition notices Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com> - 2017-09-27 13:50 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] livepatch: add transition notices Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com> - 2017-09-27 17:50 +0200

#1740637 — Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] livepatch: add transition notices

On Thu 2017-08-31 10:53:53, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> Log a few kernel debug messages at the beginning of the following livepatch
> transition functions:
> 
>   klp_complete_transition()
>   klp_cancel_transition()
>   klp_init_transition()
>   klp_reverse_transition()
> 
> Also update the log notice message in klp_start_transition() for similar
> verbiage as the above messages.
> 
> Suggested-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com>
> ---
>  kernel/livepatch/transition.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/livepatch/transition.c b/kernel/livepatch/transition.c
> index 53887f0bca10..3d44a3cf27be 100644
> --- a/kernel/livepatch/transition.c
> +++ b/kernel/livepatch/transition.c
> @@ -82,6 +82,10 @@ static void klp_complete_transition(void)
>  	unsigned int cpu;
>  	bool immediate_func = false;
>  
> +	pr_debug("'%s': completing %s transition\n",
> +		 klp_transition_patch->mod->name,
> +		 klp_target_state == KLP_PATCHED ? "patching" : "unpatching");
> +
>  	if (klp_target_state == KLP_UNPATCHED) {
>  		/*
>  		 * All tasks have transitioned to KLP_UNPATCHED so we can now
> @@ -163,6 +167,9 @@ void klp_cancel_transition(void)
>  	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(klp_target_state != KLP_PATCHED))
>  		return;
>  
> +	pr_debug("'%s': canceling transition, unpatching\n",

This sentence is a bit confusing. It is related to the Mirek's concern
about that the following message would be "completing unpatching transition".

What about using something like:

	pr_debug("'%s': canceling patching transition, going to unpatch\n",


Best Regards,
Petr

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1740849

On 09/27/2017 07:49 AM, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Thu 2017-08-31 10:53:53, Joe Lawrence wrote:
>> Log a few kernel debug messages at the beginning of the following livepatch
>> transition functions:
>>
>>   klp_complete_transition()
>>   klp_cancel_transition()
>>   klp_init_transition()
>>   klp_reverse_transition()
>>
>> Also update the log notice message in klp_start_transition() for similar
>> verbiage as the above messages.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com>
>> ---
>>  kernel/livepatch/transition.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
>>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/livepatch/transition.c b/kernel/livepatch/transition.c
>> index 53887f0bca10..3d44a3cf27be 100644
>> --- a/kernel/livepatch/transition.c
>> +++ b/kernel/livepatch/transition.c
>> @@ -82,6 +82,10 @@ static void klp_complete_transition(void)
>>  	unsigned int cpu;
>>  	bool immediate_func = false;
>>  
>> +	pr_debug("'%s': completing %s transition\n",
>> +		 klp_transition_patch->mod->name,
>> +		 klp_target_state == KLP_PATCHED ? "patching" : "unpatching");
>> +
>>  	if (klp_target_state == KLP_UNPATCHED) {
>>  		/*
>>  		 * All tasks have transitioned to KLP_UNPATCHED so we can now
>> @@ -163,6 +167,9 @@ void klp_cancel_transition(void)
>>  	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(klp_target_state != KLP_PATCHED))
>>  		return;
>>  
>> +	pr_debug("'%s': canceling transition, unpatching\n",
> 
> This sentence is a bit confusing. It is related to the Mirek's concern
> about that the following message would be "completing unpatching transition".
> 
> What about using something like:
> 
> 	pr_debug("'%s': canceling patching transition, going to unpatch\n",
> 
> 
> Best Regards,
> Petr

Yeah, what I had was more of a comma splice for brevity... no problem
adopting a clearer wording as you suggested.

Thanks

-- Joe

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web