On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 08:42:29AM +0800, Li Bin wrote: > On 2015/1/21 22:08, Jiri Kosina wrote: > > On Wed, 21 Jan 2015, Li Bin wrote: > > By this you limit the definition of the patch inter-dependency to just > > symbols. But that's not the only way how patches can depend on it other -- > > the dependency can be semantical. > > Yes, I agree with you. But I think the other dependencies such as semantical > dependency should be judged by the user, like reverting a patch from git repository. > Right? But with live patching, there are two users: the patch creator (who creates the patch module) and the end user (who loads it on their system). We can assume the patch creator knows what he's doing, but the end user doesn't always know or care about low level details like patch dependencies. The easiest and safest way to protect the end user is the current approach, which assumes that each patch depends on all previously applied patches. -- Josh -- 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
