From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Oren Laadan Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpoint/restart of robust futex lists Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2009 14:34:37 -0400 Message-ID: <4A2D59BD.8020300@cs.columbia.edu> References: <20090603041919.GO9285@us.ibm.com> <4A2C7972.9090404@cs.columbia.edu> <20090608140810.GB29432@us.ibm.com> <4A2D3CE3.6030400@cs.columbia.edu> <20090608165951.GA3610@us.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20090608165951.GA3610-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+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 List-Id: containers.vger.kernel.org Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > Quoting Oren Laadan (orenl-eQaUEPhvms7ENvBUuze7eA@public.gmane.org): >> >> Serge E. Hallyn wrote: >>> IIUC (from Matt and Dave), after this patch, you might need something >>> for PI futexes, but otherwise non-contended cases "just work" because >>> there is no kernel involvement. >> That's what I thought. But I also thought that a checkpoint would >> fail anyway as soon as it hits the futex-file-descriptor. Or am I >> missing something ? > > Yes - FUTEX_FD no longer exists :) Heh .. need to catch up ! Oren.