Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753855AbYJUJg2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Oct 2008 05:36:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752452AbYJUJgV (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Oct 2008 05:36:21 -0400 Received: from mtagate3.uk.ibm.com ([195.212.29.136]:51297 "EHLO mtagate3.uk.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752395AbYJUJgU (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Oct 2008 05:36:20 -0400 Message-ID: <48FDA28B.30204@fr.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:36:11 +0200 From: Cedric Le Goater User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080723) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Oren Laadan CC: Daniel Lezcano , Louis.Rilling@kerlabs.com, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, Dave Hansen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrey Mirkin Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] OpenVZ kernel based checkpointing/restart References: <1220439476-16465-1-git-send-email-major@openvz.org> <1224286383.1848.65.camel@nimitz> <20081020111002.GQ15171@hawkmoon.kerlabs.com> <48FC86B2.8000606@fr.ibm.com> <48FCA97C.1040108@cs.columbia.edu> In-Reply-To: <48FCA97C.1040108@cs.columbia.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1557 Lines: 34 >> IMHO we should look at Dmitry patchset and merge the external checkpoint >> code to Oren's patchset in order to checkpoint *one* process and have >> the process to restart itself. At this point, we can begin to talk about >> the restart itself, shall we have the kernel to fork the processes to be >> restarted ? shall we fork from userspace and implement some mechanism to >> have each processes to restart themselves ? etc... >> > > In both approaches, processes restart themselves, in the sense that a > process to be restarted eventually calls "do_restart()" (or equivalent). > > The only question is how processes are created. Andrew's patch creates > everything inside the kernel. I would like to still give it a try outside > the kernel. Everything is ready, except that we need a way to pre-select > a PID for the new child... we never agreed on that one, did we ? what do you mean ? like a clone_with_pid() routine ? > If we go ahead with the kernel-based process creation, it's easy to merge > it to the current patch-set. Both solution are valid. Nevertheless, I would choose the solution sharing existing code and being arch independent. Now, we can start by duplicating code and see later how we could share. But for mainline inclusion, I think that code reuse is a faster path. C. -- 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/