From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Oren Laadan Subject: Re: [RFC v13][PATCH 00/14] Kernel based checkpoint/restart Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 23:57:45 -0400 Message-ID: <49B9D9B9.4070508@cs.columbia.edu> References: <1233076092-8660-1-git-send-email-orenl@cs.columbia.edu> <1234285547.30155.6.camel@nimitz> <20090211141434.dfa1d079.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1234462282.30155.171.camel@nimitz> <20090213152836.0fbbfa7d.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <49B9C8E0.5080500@cs.columbia.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <49B9C8E0.5080500@cs.columbia.edu> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Andrew Morton Cc: linux-api@vger.kernel.org, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Hansen , linux-mm@kvack.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, hpa@zytor.com, mingo@elte.hu, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, tglx@linutronix.de List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org Oren Laadan wrote: > Hi, > > Just got back from 3 weeks with practically no internet, and I see > that I missed a big party ! > > Trying to catch up with what's been said so far -- [...] >>>> >>>> - Will any of this involve non-trivial serialisation of kernel >>>> objects? If so, that's getting into the >>>> unacceptably-expensive-to-maintain space, I suspect. >>> We have some structures that are certainly tied to the kernel-internal >>> ones. However, we are certainly *not* simply writing kernel structures >>> to userspace. We could do that with /dev/mem. We are carefully pulling >>> out the minimal bits of information from the kernel structures that we >>> *need* to recreate the function of the structure at restart. There is a >>> maintenance burden here but, so far, that burden is almost entirely in >>> checkpoint/*.c. We intend to test this functionality thoroughly to >>> ensure that we don't regress once we have integrated it. >> I guess my question can be approximately simplified to: "will it end up >> looking like openvz"? (I don't believe that we know of any other way >> of implementing this?) >> >> Because if it does then that's a concern, because my assessment when I >> looked at that code (a number of years ago) was that having code of >> that nature in mainline would be pretty costly to us, and rather >> unwelcome. > > I originally implemented c/r for linux as as kernel module, without > requiring any changes from the kernel. (Doing the namespaces as a kernel > module was much harder). For more details, see: > https://www.ncl.cs.columbia.edu/research/migrate oops... I meant the following link: http://www.ncl.cs.columbia.edu/research/migration/ see, for example, the papers from DejaView (SOSP 07) and Zap (USENIX 07). Oren. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org