[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1223916223.29877.14.camel@nimitz>
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 09:43:43 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Cedric Le Goater <clg@...ibm.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, jeremy@...p.org, arnd@...db.de,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andrey Mirkin <major@...nvz.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC v6][PATCH 0/9] Kernel based checkpoint/restart
On Mon, 2008-10-13 at 10:13 +0200, Cedric Le Goater wrote:
> hmm, that's rather complex, because we have to take into account the
> kernel stack, no ? This is what Andrey was trying to solve in his patchset
> back in September :
>
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/9/3/96
>
> the restart phase simulates a clone and switch_to to (not) restore the kernel
> stack. right ?
Do we ever have to worry about the kernel stack if we simply say that
tasks have to be *in* userspace when we checkpoint them. If a task is
in an uninterruptable wait state, I'm not sure it's safe to checkpoint
it anyway.
-- 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