Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756641Ab3JGTDe (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Oct 2013 15:03:34 -0400 Received: from mail-ye0-f173.google.com ([209.85.213.173]:40502 "EHLO mail-ye0-f173.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756609Ab3JGTD1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Oct 2013 15:03:27 -0400 Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 14:57:48 -0400 From: Tejun Heo To: Pavel Emelyanov Cc: Janani Venkataraman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, amwang@redhat.com, rdunlap@xenotime.net, andi@firstfloor.org, aravinda@linux.vnet.ibm.com, hch@lst.de, mhiramat@redhat.com, jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com, suzuki@linux.vnet.ibm.com, kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, adobriyan@gmail.com, tarundsk@linux.vnet.ibm.com, vapier@gentoo.org, roland@hack.frob.com, ananth@linux.vnet.ibm.com, gorcunov@openvz.org, avagin@openvz.org, oleg@redhat.com, eparis@redhat.com, d.hatayama@jp.fujitsu.com, james.hogan@imgtec.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 00/19] Non disruptive application core dump infrastructure using task_work_add() Message-ID: <20131007185748.GE27396@htj.dyndns.org> References: <20131004102532.1612.24185.stgit@f19-x64> <524E9AB3.2080307@parallels.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <524E9AB3.2080307@parallels.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1235 Lines: 34 Hello, On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 02:38:43PM +0400, Pavel Emelyanov wrote: > > * It is not upstream yet. > > It is, starting from criu-v0.7 + linux-3.11 > > > * There are concerns about the security of the dump. > > Can you elaborate on this? Is it fixable in CRIU at all? > > > * It involves a lot of changes and this approach provides a UNIX style > > interface. > > Can you also shed more light on this -- what changes do you mean? Yeah, I'd like to hear more too. It doesn't make much sense to me to add something completely new if it can be served mostly by the existing infrastructure. Also, what do you mean by "disruption"? You mentioned signal but PTRACE_SEIZE is completely transparent w.r.t. signals. If you mean without stopping the target process's execution, what are you trying to use the dumping for and how much gain are we talking about? Also, isn't it kinda mandatory to stop the process to get a consistent dump? What am I missing here? Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/