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  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:	Sun, 1 Mar 2009 11:00:10 -0600
From:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
To:	Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Oren Laadan <orenl@...columbia.edu>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>, hch@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 8/8] check files for checkpointability

Quoting Sukadev Bhattiprolu (sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com):
> Dave Hansen [dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com] wrote:
> | 
> | Introduce a files_struct counter to indicate whether a particular
> | file_struct has ever contained a file which can not be
> | checkpointed.  This flag is a one-way trip; once it is set, it may
> | not be unset.
> | 
> | We assume at allocation that a new files_struct is clean and may
> | be checkpointed.  However, as soon as it has had its files filled
> | from its parent's, we check it for real in __scan_files_for_cr().
> | At that point, we mark it if it contained any uncheckpointable
> | files.
> 
> Hmm. Why not just copy ->may_checkpoint setting from parent (or old)
> files_struct ? If parent is not checkpointable, then child won't be
> and vice-versa - no ?

No.  We don't clear the files_struct checkpointable flag when an
uncheckpointable file is closed.  But if the parent has closed
all uncheckpointable files before forking, then the child can
be started with a checkpointable files_struct.

Otherwise it wouldn't just be the task which has a one-way trip to
uncheckpointability, but process trees, and - assuming init does
anything uncheckpointable at all - the whole system :)

-serge
--
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