[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081022142907.GA13574@caradoc.them.org>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 10:29:07 -0400
From: Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@...ian.org>
To: Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Oren Laadan <orenl@...columbia.edu>, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, mingo@...e.hu,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, hpa@...or.com,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [RFC v7][PATCH 2/9] General infrastructure for checkpoint
restart
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 08:02:43PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> Let's say you have a process you want to checkpoint. If it uses a
> completely discrete IPC namespace, you *know* that nothing else depends
> on those IPC ids. We don't even have to worry about who might have been
> using them and when.
>
> Also think about pids. Without containers, how can you guarantee a
> restarted process that it can regain the same pid?
OK, that makes sense. In a lot of simple cases you can get by without
regaining the same pid; there's an implementation of checkpointing in
GDB that works by injecting fork calls into the child, and it is
useful for a reasonable selection of single-threaded programs.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
--
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