On Thu, Apr 2, 2026 at 2:26 AM Yafang Shao <[email protected]> wrote: > > Add a new replaceable attribute to allow the coexistence of both > atomic-replace and non-atomic-replace livepatches. If replaceable is set to > 0, the livepatch will not be replaced by a subsequent atomic-replace > operation. > > This is a preparatory patch for following changes.
IIRC, the use case for this change is when multiple users load various livepatch modules on the same system. I still don't believe this is the right way to manage livepatches. That said, I won't really NACK this if other folks think this is a useful option. In case we really want a feature like this, shall we add a replaceable flag to each function (klp_func)? This will give us fine granularity control. For example, user A has a non-replaceable livepatch on func_a; later user B wants to patch another version of func_a. Then some logic can detect such a conflict and reject the load of user B's livepatch. Does this make sense? Thanks, Song
