From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Adrian Reber Subject: Re: linux-cr ported to 3.1 Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 14:52:19 +0200 Message-ID: <20111028125219.GZ20908@lisas.de> References: <20111027142731.GT20908@lisas.de> <20111027144125.GA14452@hallyn.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111027144125.GA14452-A9i7LUbDfNHQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org Errors-To: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org To: "Serge E. Hallyn" Cc: containers-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org, Nathan Lynch , Dan Smith List-Id: containers.vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 02:41:25PM +0000, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > Quoting Adrian Reber (adrian-5+Cda9B46AM@public.gmane.org): > > > > I have ported the linux-cr patches from www.linux-cr.org/pub/git/linux-cr.git > > to the latest kernel (3.1). What I have tested so far it still seems to work. > > Wow, that's great! > > Since you went to the trouble of doing this, can we assume you have a pretty > strong interest in this set? :) If so, Yes, I have. > > Can anybody tell me what the latest state of these patches was? > > Development seemed to have stopped after 2.6.37 and with the wiki[1] being > > down I do not know if anybody is still working on these patches. What > > Matt and Dan, if there is outside interest, are you able to help out at > all? Are you still using this set at all? > > Oren, what's your status? > > > was the latest status about those patches being integrated into > > mainline? Is someone still trying to get it included? > > There is a new upstream effort based around pushing smaller debugging-style > patches, which rather than adding a 'sys_checkpoint' syscall, allow userspace > to get the information they need to reconstruct a process set. Several people, > Daniel (Cc:d) included, seem to prefer this approach. See > http://lwn.net/Articles/452184/ for instance. > > You might peruse the recent lkml threads (and the above article). If you are > ok with that approach, you might consider joining them. AFAICS they've not > done much in the last few months, though I may just have missed it. I interested in whatever approach works best. I just choose the linux-cr tree because it seemed to be the most recent development and it worked. Adrian