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:	Thu, 12 Mar 2009 23:57:45 -0400
From:	Oren Laadan <orenl@...columbia.edu>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	linux-api@...r.kernel.org, containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, hpa@...or.com, mingo@...e.hu,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [RFC v13][PATCH 00/14] Kernel based checkpoint/restart



Oren Laadan wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Just got back from 3 weeks with practically no internet, and I see
> that I missed a big party !
> 
> Trying to catch up with what's been said so far --

[...]

>>>>
>>>> - Will any of this involve non-trivial serialisation of kernel
>>>>   objects?  If so, that's getting into the
>>>>   unacceptably-expensive-to-maintain space, I suspect.
>>> We have some structures that are certainly tied to the kernel-internal
>>> ones.  However, we are certainly *not* simply writing kernel structures
>>> to userspace.  We could do that with /dev/mem.  We are carefully pulling
>>> out the minimal bits of information from the kernel structures that we
>>> *need* to recreate the function of the structure at restart.  There is a
>>> maintenance burden here but, so far, that burden is almost entirely in
>>> checkpoint/*.c.  We intend to test this functionality thoroughly to
>>> ensure that we don't regress once we have integrated it.
>> I guess my question can be approximately simplified to: "will it end up
>> looking like openvz"?  (I don't believe that we know of any other way
>> of implementing this?)
>>
>> Because if it does then that's a concern, because my assessment when I
>> looked at that code (a number of years ago) was that having code of
>> that nature in mainline would be pretty costly to us, and rather
>> unwelcome.
> 
> I originally implemented c/r for linux as as kernel module, without
> requiring any changes from the kernel. (Doing the namespaces as a kernel
> module was much harder). For more details, see:
> 	https://www.ncl.cs.columbia.edu/research/migrate

oops... I meant the following link:
	http://www.ncl.cs.columbia.edu/research/migration/

see, for example, the papers from DejaView (SOSP 07) and Zap (USENIX 07).

Oren.


--
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