Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758105AbYJKPBL (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Oct 2008 11:01:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753966AbYJKPA5 (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Oct 2008 11:00:57 -0400 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:37090 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752281AbYJKPA5 (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Oct 2008 11:00:57 -0400 Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2008 17:00:22 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Pavel Machek Cc: Dave Hansen , "Serge E. Hallyn" , containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, arnd@arndb.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Arjan van de Ven , Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] first callers of process_deny_checkpoint() Message-ID: <20081011150022.GA18989@elte.hu> References: <20081009190405.13A253CB@kernel> <20081009190406.1B257119@kernel> <20081009194350.GA31214@us.ibm.com> <1223585671.11830.40.camel@nimitz> <20081010084614.GA319@elte.hu> <20081011134803.GA1483@ucw.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081011134803.GA1483@ucw.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00,DNS_FROM_SECURITYSAGE autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] 0.0 DNS_FROM_SECURITYSAGE RBL: Envelope sender in blackholes.securitysage.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1437 Lines: 35 * Pavel Machek wrote: > > In the long run, could we expect a (experimental) version of > > hibernation that would just use this checkpointing facility to > > hibernate? That would be way cool for users and for testing: we > > could do transparent kernel upgrades/downgrades via this form of > > hibernation, between CR-compatible kernels (!). > > Well, if we could do that, I guess we could also use CR to 'hibernate' > your desktop then continue on your notebook. And yes that sounds cool. yes. > > Pie in the sky for sure, but way cool: it could propel Linux kernel > > testing to completely new areas - new kernels could be tried > > non-intrusively. (as long as a new kernel does not corrupt the CR > > data structures - so some good consistency and redundancy checking > > would be nice in the format!) > > Well, for simple apps, it should not be that hard... Generally, if something works for simple apps already (in a robust, compatible and supportable way) and users find it "very cool", then support for more complex apps is not far in the future. but if you want to support more complex apps straight away, it takes forever and gets ugly. Ingo -- 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/