| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <48FC8C51.2050108@fr.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 15:49:05 +0200 From: Daniel Lezcano <dlezcano@...ibm.com> To: Cedric Le Goater <clg@...ibm.com> CC: Louis.Rilling@...labs.com, Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, Andrey Mirkin <major@...nvz.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] OpenVZ kernel based checkpointing/restart Cedric Le Goater wrote: >>> I'm afraid that we are forgetting to take the best from both >>> approaches... >> I agree with Louis. >> >> I played with Oren's patchset and tryed to port it on x86_64. I was able >> to sys_checkpoint/sys_restart but if you remove the restoring of the >> general registers, the restart still works. I am not an expert on asm, >> but my hypothesis is when we call sys_checkpoint the registers are saved >> on the stack by the syscall and when we restore the memory of the >> process, we restore the stack and the stacked registers are restored >> when exiting the sys_restart. That make me feel there is an important >> gap between external checkpoint and internal checkpoint. >> >> Dmitry's patchset is nice too, but IMO, it goes too far from what we > > I think you are talking about Andrey. Yes :) -- 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