| 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: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 11:00:18 +0400 From: Kirill Korotaev <dev@...allels.com> To: Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> CC: containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Nadia.Derbey@...l.net, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, nick@...k-andrew.net, Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com> Subject: Re: Checkpoint/restart (was Re: [PATCH 0/4] - v2 - Object creation with a specified id) Yeah... we talked with Andrew yesterday. He mostly agrees with a black box. He also said an interesting idea, that if you need compatibility between the kernels (like we for example, support for migration from 2.6.9 to 2.6.18 in OpenVZ) you can do image conversion in user-space... Though I think we will prefer simply to have a compatibility patch for specific kernel versions in our kernel tree (not in mainstream). Definitely, other ideas/opinions are welcome. Kirill Dave Hansen wrote: > On Wed, 2008-04-23 at 10:40 +0400, Kirill Korotaev wrote: >> Having all this functionality in a signle syscall we specifically CLAIM a black box, >> and that no one can use this interfaces for something different from checkpoint/restore. >> >> So I think we have to know what other maintainers think before we can go. > > I completely agree. > > Have you asked any particular maintainers what they think? > > -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists