All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Hansen <dave-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>
To: containers <containers-qjLDD68F18O7TbgM5vRIOg@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo-X9Un+BFzKDI@public.gmane.org>,
	Nathan Lynch <nathanl-V7BBcbaFuwjMbYB6QlFGEg@public.gmane.org>,
	Alexey Dobriyan
	<adobriyan-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch-jcswGhMUV9g@public.gmane.org>
Subject: thoughts on checkpointing /proc/mounts
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 10:48:39 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1236019719.26788.505.camel@nimitz> (raw)

Christoph's suggestion that we go add f_ops individually is a really
good way to get people thinking about individual cases that we have to
deal with.

Can we checkpoint an *open* /proc/mounts?  I don't think we want to.  It
could get really nasty really fast.  But, what if the f_pos is 0?  That
makes it a lot easier.

If the "may checkpoint" flag is per-container (as Alexey has said) and
one-way (as Ingo has said), does a single 'cat /proc/mounts' 5 days ago
keep a container from being checkpointed today?

I just don't think the container-wide flag works if it is one way.

I think making it per-process or per-resource (so it can be more easily
tracked at fork()/clone()/exec()) is the only way to go.  It makes it so
simple since only the 'cat /proc/mounts' process becomes
uncheckpointable.  Once it exits, we are OK and can checkpoint again.
That all seems right to me. 

-- Dave

             reply	other threads:[~2009-03-02 18:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-03-02 18:48 Dave Hansen [this message]
2009-03-02 19:43 ` thoughts on checkpointing /proc/mounts Serge E. Hallyn

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1236019719.26788.505.camel@nimitz \
    --to=dave-23vcf4htsmix0ybbhkvfkdbpr1lh4cv8@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=adobriyan-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=containers-qjLDD68F18O7TbgM5vRIOg@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=hch-jcswGhMUV9g@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=mingo-X9Un+BFzKDI@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=nathanl-V7BBcbaFuwjMbYB6QlFGEg@public.gmane.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.