On Mon, 15 Feb 2016, Jessica Yu wrote:
> +++ Jiri Kosina [16/02/16 00:42 +0100]:
> > On Mon, 15 Feb 2016, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> >
> > > So I think the commit causing the regression is 5156dca34a3e, which
> > > occurred in the 4.5 cycle, *not* in 4.4.
> >
> > Agreed, by "4.4 regresion" I mean "regression compared to 4.4"; i.e.
> > regression that will become real issue once 4.5 is released.
> >
> > > Also it's my understanding that only the third patch ("remove ftrace
> > > module notifier") is needed to fix the regression, and the other patches
> > > are just general improvements. So if needed I think we can just rebase
> > > that patch (which already has Rusty's ack I believe) and send it to
> > > Linus now.
> >
> > 3/4 and 4/4 are be sufficient, yes (although I'd like to have this
> > confimed by Jessica, as she apparently already has a reliable testcase).
>
> Yes, so Josh is right; technically only patch 3/4 "ftrace/module:
> remove ftrace module notifier" is sufficient enough to fix the bug,
> and patch 4/4 is just a natural extension of that change. Since I'm
> going to be sending out another patchset anyway without the module.c
> cleanups, I'll just keep them together.
Yes, 3/4 should be sufficient to fix the bug. However if you take 4/4 too,
you need 1/4 as well. Otherwise we would introduce a bug in error handling
as Petr pointed out.
Cheers,
Miroslav
--
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
