[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090212221741.GA13861@x200.localdomain>
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 01:17:41 +0300
From: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, hpa@...or.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, linux-api@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>
Subject: Re: What can OpenVZ do?
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 01:51:23PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 11:42 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 13:30:35 -0600
> > Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 10:11 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > >
> > > > > - In bullet-point form, what features are missing, and should be added?
> > > >
> > > > * support for more architectures than i386
> > > > * file descriptors:
> > > > * sockets (network, AF_UNIX, etc...)
> > > > * devices files
> > > > * shmfs, hugetlbfs
> > > > * epoll
> > > > * unlinked files
> > >
> > > > * Filesystem state
> > > > * contents of files
> > > > * mount tree for individual processes
> > > > * flock
> > > > * threads and sessions
> > > > * CPU and NUMA affinity
> > > > * sys_remap_file_pages()
> > >
> > > I think the real questions is: where are the dragons hiding? Some of
> > > these are known to be hard. And some of them are critical checkpointing
> > > typical applications. If you have plans or theories for implementing all
> > > of the above, then great. But this list doesn't really give any sense of
> > > whether we should be scared of what lurks behind those doors.
> >
> > How close has OpenVZ come to implementing all of this? I think the
> > implementatation is fairly complete?
>
> I also believe it is "fairly complete". At least able to be used
> practically.
>
> > If so, perhaps that can be used as a guide. Will the planned feature
> > have a similar design? If not, how will it differ? To what extent can
> > we use that implementation as a tool for understanding what this new
> > implementation will look like?
>
> Yes, we can certainly use it as a guide. However, there are some
> barriers to being able to do that:
>
> dave@...itz:~/kernels/linux-2.6-openvz$ git diff v2.6.27.10... | diffstat | tail -1
> 628 files changed, 59597 insertions(+), 2927 deletions(-)
> dave@...itz:~/kernels/linux-2.6-openvz$ git diff v2.6.27.10... | wc
> 84887 290855 2308745
git-diff -- kernel/cpt/
should give more realistic picture.
> Unfortunately, the git tree doesn't have that great of a history. It
> appears that the forward-ports are just applications of huge single
> patches which then get committed into git. This tree has also
> historically contained a bunch of stuff not directly related to
> checkpoint/restart like resource management.
> We'd be idiots not to take a hard look at what has been done in OpenVZ.
> But, for the time being, we have absolutely no shortage of things that
> we know are important and know have to be done. Our largest problem is
> not finding things to do, but is our large out-of-tree patch that is
> growing by the day. :(
--
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