linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/9] OpenVZ kernel based checkpointing/restart

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:	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/