> That still doesn't explain *why* live patching is needed.
True enough.
When a requirement is based in 30 years of tradition and practice, it
takes work to to back it up to the essentials that would distinguish
accurately between adequate and inadequate alternatives. And that I
presume is what you mean by the emphasized *why*.
--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <[email protected]> 1.650.933.1373, 1.925.600.0401
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- References:
- [PATCH x86_64] Live Patching Function on 2.6.11.7
- From: Takashi Ikebe <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH x86_64] Live Patching Function on 2.6.11.7
- From: Chris Wedgwood <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH x86_64] Live Patching Function on 2.6.11.7
- From: Takashi Ikebe <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH x86_64] Live Patching Function on 2.6.11.7
- From: Chris Wedgwood <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH x86_64] Live Patching Function on 2.6.11.7
- From: Takashi Ikebe <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH x86_64] Live Patching Function on 2.6.11.7
- From: Chris Wedgwood <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH x86_64] Live Patching Function on 2.6.11.7
- From: Paul Jackson <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH x86_64] Live Patching Function on 2.6.11.7
- From: Chris Wedgwood <[email protected]>
- [PATCH x86_64] Live Patching Function on 2.6.11.7
- Prev by Date: Re: increasing scsi_max_sg / max_segments for scsi writes/reads
- Next by Date: Re: intercepting syscalls
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH x86_64] Live Patching Function on 2.6.11.7
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH x86_64] Live Patching Function on 2.6.11.7
- Index(es):
 |