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
next 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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox