linux-kernel - Re: What can OpenVZ do?

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: <20090213113248.GA15275@x200.localdomain>
Date:	Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:32:48 +0300
From:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	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,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>
Subject: Re: What can OpenVZ do?

On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 11:27:32AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> > > 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
> > 
> > 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.
> 
> Really, OpenVZ/Virtuozzo does not seem to have enough incentive to merge
> upstream, they only seem to forward-port, keep their tree messy, do minimal
> work to reduce the cross section to the rest of the kernel (so that they can
> manage the forward ports) but otherwise are happy with their carved-out
> niche market. [which niche is also spiced with some proprietary add-ons,
> last i checked, not exactly the contribution environment that breeds a
> healthy flow of patches towards the upstream kernel.]

Oh, cut the crap!

> Merging checkpoints instead might give them the incentive to get
> their act together.

Knowing how much time it takes to beat CPT back into usable shape every time
big kernel rebase is done, OpenVZ/Virtuozzo have every single damn incentive
to have CPT mainlined.

If someone is afraid of long config options, there are always CONFIG_CPT and
CONFIG_CR available.
--
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/