On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 11:09:54AM +0800, zhangwarden@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > From: Wardenjohn <zhangwarden@xxxxxxxxx> > > In livepatch, using KLP_UNDEFINED is seems to be confused. > When kernel is ready, livepatch is ready too, which state is > idle but not undefined. What's more, if one livepatch process > is finished, the klp state should be idle rather than undefined. > > Therefore, using KLP_IDLE to replace KLP_UNDEFINED is much better > in reading and understanding. > --- > include/linux/livepatch.h | 1 + > kernel/livepatch/patch.c | 2 +- > kernel/livepatch/transition.c | 24 ++++++++++++------------ > 3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/include/linux/livepatch.h b/include/linux/livepatch.h > index 9b9b38e89563..c1c53cd5b227 100644 > --- a/include/linux/livepatch.h > +++ b/include/linux/livepatch.h > @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ > > /* task patch states */ > #define KLP_UNDEFINED -1 > +#define KLP_IDLE -1 Hi Wardenjohn, Quick question, does this patch intend to: - Completely replace KLP_UNDEFINED with KLP_IDLE - Introduce KLP_IDLE as an added, fourth potential state - Introduce KLP_IDLE as synonym of sorts for KLP_UNDEFINED under certain conditions I ask because this patch leaves KLP_UNDEFINED defined and used in other parts of the tree (ie, init/init_task.c), yet KLP_IDLE is added and continues to use the same -1 enumeration. -- Joe
