[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1236013556.26788.466.camel@nimitz>
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:05:56 -0800
From: Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 5/8] add f_op for checkpointability
On Sat, 2009-02-28 at 15:53 -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Also the double-use of the op seem not very nice to me. Is there any
> real life use case were you would have the operation on a file but
> sometimes not allow checkpoiting?
I'm still reaching here...
I was thinking of /proc. Opening your own /proc/$$/* would certainly be
considered OK. But, doing it for some other process not in your pid
namespace would not be OK and would not be checkpointable.
I know we're not quite in real-life territory here, yet, but I'm still
thinking.
-- Dave
--
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