Sobre o Kernel live-patching:
"Let me provide a bit of history first, before describing what is in this pile. Originally, there was kSplice as a standalone project that implemented stop_machine()-based patching for the linux kernel.
This project got later acquired, and the current owner is providing live patching as a proprietary service, without any intentions to have their implementation merged. Then, due to rising user/customer demand, both Red Hat and SUSE started working on their own implementation (not knowing about each other), and announced first versions roughly at the same time [1] [2].
The principle difference between the two solutions is how they are making sure that the patching is performed in a consistent way when it comes to different execution threads with respect to the semantic nature of the change that is being introduced.
In a nutshell, kPatch is issuing stop_machine(), then looking at stacks of all existing processess, and if it decides that the system is in a state that can be patched safely, it proceeds insterting code redirection machinery to the patched functions. On the other hand, kGraft provides a per-thread consistency during one single pass of a process through the kernel and performs a lazy contignuous migration of threads from "unpatched" universe to the "patched" one at safe checkpoints. If interested in a more detailed discussion about the consistency models and its possible combinations, please see the thread that evolved around [3].
It pretty quickly became obvious to the interested parties that it's absolutely impractical in this case to have several isolated solutions for one task to co-exist in the kernel. During a dedicated Live Kernel Patching track at LPC in Dusseldorf, all the interested parties sat together and came up with a joint aproach that would work for both distro vendors. Steven Rostedt took notes [4] from this meeting. And the foundation for that aproach is what's present in this pull request.
It provides a basic infrastructure for function "live patching" (i.e. code redirection), including API for kernel modules containing the actual patches, and API/ABI for userspace to be able to operate on the patches (look up what patches are applied, enable/disable them, etc). It's relatively simple and minimalistic, as it's making use of existing kernel infrastructure (namely ftrace) as much as possible. It's also self-contained, in a sense that it doesn't hook itself in any other kernel subsystem (it doesn't even touch any other code).
It's now implemented for x86 only as a reference architecture, but support for *****, s390 and arm is already in the works (adding arch-specific support basically boils down to teaching ftrace about regs-saving). Once this common infrastructure gets merged, both Red Hat and SUSE have agreed to immediately start porting their current solutions on top of this, abandoning their out-of-tree code.
The plan basically is that each patch will be marked by flag(s) that would indicate which consistency model it is willing to use (again, the details have been sketched out already in the thread at [3]). Before this happens, the current codebase can be used to patch a large group of secruity/stability problems the patches for which are not too complex (in a sense that they don't introduce non-trivial change of function's return value semantics, they don't change layout of data structures, etc) -- this corresponds to LEAVE_FUNCTION && SWITCH_FUNCTION semantics described at [3].
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/k.../?id=1d9c5d79e6e4385aea6f69c23ba543717434ed70
