[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090302174433.GA12708@us.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 11:44:33 -0600
From: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Nathan Lynch <ntl@...ox.com>,
containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
hch@...radead.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 8/8] check files for checkpointability
Quoting Dave Hansen (dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com):
> On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 11:22 -0600, Nathan Lynch wrote:
> > No.. I mean what if a process 1234 does
> >
> > f = fopen("/proc/1234/stat", "r");
> >
> > and is then checkpointed. Can that path be resolved during restart,
> > before pid 1234 is alive?
>
> Heh, that's a good one.
>
> It does mean that we can't do restore like this:
>
> for_each_cr_task()
> restore_task_struct()
> restore_files()
> ...
>
> We have to do:
>
> for_each_cr_task()
> restore_task_struct()
> for_each_cr_task()
> restore_files()
>
>
> -- Dave
Which is what we actually do, right?
Actually we have userspace create the tasks first, and
then each task calls sys_restart which does restore_files().
-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