From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8B869A0 for ; Sun, 4 May 2014 08:34:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com (szxga01-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.64]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F25C02031F for ; Sun, 4 May 2014 08:34:06 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <5365FB78.8020901@huawei.com> Date: Sun, 4 May 2014 16:34:00 +0800 From: Li Zefan MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jiri Kosina References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] [TECH TOPIC] live kernel patching List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 2014/5/3 3:42, Jiri Kosina wrote: > Runtime/live kernel patching is becoming a topic these days. There are > several parallel implementations currently evolving in parallel (kpatch, > kgraft, criu-based solution, ksplice to some extent), all of them having > their pros and cons. > > It's clear that what is going to get merged at the end of the day would > have to be some super-position of the currently existing solutions. > > Finding a reasonable compromise might be challenging. Having discussion > between the groups working on those solutions (tech topic) and with > "general maintainer audience" to face the flame^W^W^Wobtain feedback > (core topic) would be very valuable step in converging to unified > solution. > > Suggested participants: see the list of "competing" projects above > Thanks for working on KGraft! In Huawei we want to use live patching, but we're conservative, so we really want to see a mainline solution.