public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	containers <containers@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/5] check files for checkpointability
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 16:30:30 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1235435430.26788.212.camel@nimitz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090223234911.GB2590@us.ibm.com>

On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 17:49 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Dave Hansen (dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com): 
> > Introduce a files_struct counter to indicate whether a particular
> > file_struct has ever contained a file which can not be
> > checkpointed.  This flag is a one-way trip; once it is set, it may
> > not be unset.
> > 
> > We assume at allocation that a new files_struct is clean and may
> > be checkpointed.  However, as soon as it has had its files filled
> > from its parent's, we check it for real in __scan_files_for_cr().
> > At that point, we mark it if it contained any uncheckpointable
> > files.
> > 
> > We also check each 'struct file' when it is installed in a fd
> > slot.  This way, if anyone open()s or managed to dup() an
> > unsuppored file, we can catch it.
> 
> So what is the point of tagging the files_struct counter and
> making it a one-way trip?  Why not just check every file at
> checkpoint time?

We need both.

This allows us to tell where and when we went wrong.  Take a process
that's been running for a month.  After 5 days it did something random
to keep it from being checkpointed.  You're going to have forgotten all
about it 25 days later.  This gives us an opportunity to spit into dmesg
or just plain log it.  It also gives the app some ability to reflect and
see what its uncheckpointable attributes are.  

-- Dave


  reply	other threads:[~2009-02-24  0:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-02-19 18:20 [RFC][PATCH 1/5] create fs flag to mark c/r supported fs's Dave Hansen
2009-02-19 18:20 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/5] file c/r: expose functions to query fs support Dave Hansen
2009-02-19 18:20 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/5] check files for checkpointability Dave Hansen
2009-02-23 23:49   ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-02-24  0:30     ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2009-02-24  1:10       ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-02-24  1:20         ` Dave Hansen
2009-02-24 19:43           ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-02-24 19:47             ` Dave Hansen
2009-02-19 18:20 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/5] breakout fdinfo sprintf() into its own function Dave Hansen
2009-02-19 18:20 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/5] add c/r info to fdinfo Dave Hansen
2009-02-19 18:23 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/5] create fs flag to mark c/r supported fs's Dave Hansen
2009-02-19 19:00 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-02-19 19:24   ` Dave Hansen

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=1235435430.26788.212.camel@nimitz \
    --to=dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
    --cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=serue@us.ibm.com \
    /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