On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 9:46 PM Petr Mladek <pmladek@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon 2024-06-10 09:32:35, Yafang Shao wrote: > > When building a livepatch, a user can set it to be either an atomic replace > > livepatch or a non atomic replace livepatch. However, it is not easy to > > identify whether a livepatch is atomic replace or not until it actually > > replaces some old livepatches. It will be beneficial to show it directly. > > > > A new sysfs interface called 'replace' is introduced in this patch. The > > result after this change is as follows: > > > > $ cat /sys/kernel/livepatch/livepatch-non_replace/replace > > 0 > > > > $ cat /sys/kernel/livepatch/livepatch-replace/replace > > 1 > > The description is not sufficient. It does not explain why this > information is useful. > > The proposed change allows to see the replace flag only when > the livepatch is already installed. But the value does > not have any effect at this point. It has effect only when > the livepatch is being installed. > > I would propose something like: > > <proposal> > There are situations when it might make sense to combine livepatches > with and without the atomic replace on the same system. For example, > the livepatch without the atomic replace might provide a hotfix > or extra tuning. > > Managing livepatches on such systems might be challenging. And the > information which of the installed livepatches do not use the atomic > replace would be useful. > > Add new sysfs interface 'replace'. It works as follows: > > $ cat /sys/kernel/livepatch/livepatch-non_replace/replace > 0 > > $ cat /sys/kernel/livepatch/livepatch-replace/replace > 1 > </proposal> > > > Signed-off-by: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@xxxxxxxxx> > > Otherwise the change looks good. > > With a better description: > > Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@xxxxxxxx> > Thanks for your review and suggestion. I will do it. -- Regards Yafang
