Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756726AbYJ3REB (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Oct 2008 13:04:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755182AbYJ3RDx (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Oct 2008 13:03:53 -0400 Received: from e8.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.138]:40385 "EHLO e8.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755154AbYJ3RDw (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Oct 2008 13:03:52 -0400 Subject: Re: [Devel] Re: [PATCH 0/9] OpenVZ kernel based checkpointing/restart From: Dave Hansen To: Andrey Mirkin Cc: Oren Laadan , "Serge E. Hallyn" , Cedric Le Goater , Daniel Lezcano , Louis Rilling , containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <200810300902.47067.major@openvz.org> References: <1220439476-16465-1-git-send-email-major@openvz.org> <200810271707.13580.major@openvz.org> <4905D2AD.1070309@cs.columbia.edu> <200810300902.47067.major@openvz.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 10:03:35 -0700 Message-Id: <1225386215.12673.280.camel@nimitz> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.3.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1471 Lines: 33 On Thu, 2008-10-30 at 10:02 +0400, Andrey Mirkin wrote: > Anyway we should ask everyone what they think about user- and kernel- based > process creation. > Dave, Serge, Cedric, Daniel, Louis what do you think about that? My worry is where a single sys_restart() plus in-kernel process creation takes us. In practice, what do we do? Do we single-thread the entire restore process? Or, do we do in-kernel process creation and have multiple kernel threads trying to read out of different points in the checkpoint file, trying to restore all their own states in parallel? Does that mean that we can't in practice restore from a fd like a pipe or a network socket? In the same way, if we *do* create the processes in userspace, how do we do _that_? Do we just fork() and sleep() until the kernel comes along and blows our state away? How does the kernel process doing the restoring tell userspace how many things to fork? How do we match these new userspace processes up with the ones coming out of the checkpoint process? To me, it's just way too early to talk about this stuff. Both approaches have their issues, and I'm yet to see the differences manifested in code so I can really sink my teeth into them -- Dave -- 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/