linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 5/8] add f

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]

Date:	Tue, 3 Mar 2009 08:15:28 -0500
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	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 Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 09:05:56AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> 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.

That mighr be a good enough excuse, I was just wondering what the use
case was.

--
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/