From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] kernel-based checkpoint restart
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2008 11:25:12 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9
Cc: Oren Laadan <orenl@cs.columbia.edu>, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>,
       "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@us.ibm.com>
References: <20080807224033.FFB3A2C1@kernel>
In-Reply-To: <20080807224033.FFB3A2C1@kernel>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200808081125.12706.arnd@arndb.de>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1269
Lines: 39

On Friday 08 August 2008, Dave Hansen wrote:
> These patches are from Oren Laaden.  I've refactored them
> a bit to make them a wee bit more reviewable.  I think this
> separates out the per-arch bits pretty well.  It should also
> be at least build-bisetable.

Cool stuff

> ============================== ckpt.c ================================
> 
> #define _GNU_SOURCE        /* or _BSD_SOURCE or _SVID_SOURCE */
> 
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <stdlib.h>
> #include <errno.h>
> #include <fcntl.h>
> #include <unistd.h>
> #include <asm/unistd_32.h>
> #include <sys/syscall.h>

Note that asm/unistd_32.h is not portable, you should use asm/unistd.h
in the example.

>         pid_t pid = getpid();
>         int ret;
>
>         ret = syscall(__NR_checkpoint, pid, STDOUT_FILENO, 0);

Interface-wise, I would consider checkpointing yourself signficantly
different from checkpointing some other thread. If checkpointing
yourself is the common case, it probably makes sense to allow passing
of pid=0 for this.

	Arnd <><
--
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/