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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 17:06:57 -0700 From: Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com> To: Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>, Oren Laadan <orenl@...columbia.edu>, xemul@...allels.com, containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, mingo@...e.hu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hch@...radead.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com> Subject: Re: "partial" container checkpoint On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 9:37 AM, Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 10:29 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: >> I think the perceived need for it comes, as above, from the pure >> checkpoint-a-whole-container-only view. So long as you will >> checkpoint/restore a whole container, then you'll end up doing >> something requiring privilege anyway. But that is not all of >> the use cases. > > Yeah, there are certainly a lot of shades of gray here. I've been > talking to some HPC guys in the last couple of days. They certainly > have a need for checkpoint/restart, but much less of a need for doing > entire containers. We'd certainly like the ability to migrate jobs that might be in their own pid namespace, but not in their own network/IPC/user/etc namespaces. Paul -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists