On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 07:51:57PM +0100, Vojtech Pavlik wrote: > I don't think this specific example was generated. > > I also don't think including the whole kpatch automation into the kernel > tree is a viable development model for it. (Same would apply for kGraft > automation.) Why? We (IMHO incorrectly) used the argument of tight coupling to put perf into the kernel tree. Generating kernel live patches is way more integrated that it absolutely has to go into the tree to be able to do proper development on it in an integrated fashion. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe live-patching" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
