linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/4] checkpoint-restart: general infrastructure

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 08 Aug 2008 15:26:51 -0700
From:	Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Oren Laadan <orenl@...columbia.edu>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/4] checkpoint-restart: general infrastructure

On Sat, 2008-08-09 at 00:13 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > I have to wonder if this is just a symptom of us trying to do this the
> > wrong way.  We're trying to talk the kernel into writing internal gunk
> > into a FD.  You're right, it is like a splice where one end of the pipe
> > is in the kernel.
> > 
> > Any thoughts on a better way to do this?  
> 
> Maybe you can invert the logic and let the new syscalls create a file
> descriptor, and then have user space read or splice the checkpoint
> data from it, and restore it by writing to the file descriptor.
> It's probably easy to do using anon_inode_getfd() and would solve this
> problem, but at the same time make checkpointing the current thread
> hard if not impossible.

Yeah, it does seem kinda backwards.  But, instead of even having to
worry about the anon_inode stuff, why don't we just put it in a fs like
everything else?  checkpointfs!

I'm also really not convinced that putting the entire checkpoint in one
glob is really the solution, either.  I mean, is system call overhead
really a problem here?

-- Dave

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/