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]

Message-ID: <48FDA28B.30204@fr.ibm.com>
Date:	Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:36:11 +0200
From:	Cedric Le Goater <clg@...ibm.com>
To:	Oren Laadan <orenl@...columbia.edu>
CC:	Daniel Lezcano <dlezcano@...ibm.com>, Louis.Rilling@...labs.com,
	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andrey Mirkin <major@...nvz.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] OpenVZ kernel based checkpointing/restart

>> IMHO we should look at Dmitry patchset and merge the external checkpoint 
>> code to Oren's patchset in order to checkpoint *one* process and have 
>> the process to restart itself. At this point, we can begin to talk about 
>> the restart itself, shall we have the kernel to fork the processes to be 
>> restarted ? shall we fork from userspace and implement some mechanism to 
>> have each processes to restart themselves ? etc...
>>
> 
> In both approaches, processes restart themselves, in the sense that a
> process to be restarted eventually calls "do_restart()" (or equivalent).
> 
> The only question is how processes are created. Andrew's patch creates
> everything inside the kernel. I would like to still give it a try outside
> the kernel. Everything is ready, except that we need a way to pre-select
> a PID for the new child... we never agreed on that one, did we ?

what do you mean ? like a clone_with_pid() routine ? 

> If we go ahead with the kernel-based process creation, it's easy to merge
> it to the current patch-set.

Both solution are valid. Nevertheless, I would choose the solution 
sharing existing code and being arch independent.

Now, we can start by duplicating code and see later how we could
share. But for mainline inclusion, I think that code reuse is a
faster path.

C.
--
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/