From: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
containers <containers@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 00/11] track files for checkpointability
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 14:24:25 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1236291865.22399.139.camel@nimitz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090305220044.GA2819@x200.localdomain>
On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 01:00 +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 01:27:07PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > > Imagine, unsupported file is opened between userspace checks
> > > for /proc/*/checkpointable and /proc/*/fdinfo/*/checkpointable
> > > and whatever, you stil have to do all the checks inside checkpoint(2).
> >
> > Alexey, we have two problems here. I completely agree that we have to
> > do complete and thorough checks of each file descriptor at
> > sys_checkpoint(). Any checks made at other times should not be trusted.
> >
> > The other side is what Ingo has been asking for. How do we *know* when
> > we are checkpointable *before* we call (and without calling)
>
> This "without calling checkpoint(2)" results in much complications
> as demonstrated.
I'll let you take that up with Ingo. :)
> task_struct and file are not like other structures because they are exposed
> in /proc.
Very true. But, we can always use the task as a proxy to say whether
any of this tasks's *resources* are uncheckpointable. Is this task's
ipc_namespace checkpointable, etc...
> For PROC_FS=n kernels, one can't even check.
Definitely. I'd be happy to make this check require PROC=y or even
DEBUGFS=y. I just want to make the mechanism usable for developers so
they're more motivated to find and fix checkpoint issues.
> You can do checkpoint(2) without actual dump. You pass, you're most
> certainly checkpointable (with inevitable race condition in mind).
OK, so you envision this as maybe calling sys_checkpoint() with a -1 fd
or something? I'm generally OK with that. If the /proc stuff is really
the sticking point here, I'd be happy to stick it at the end of the
series so we can throw it away more easily.
> With time the amount of stuff C/R won't support will approach zero,
> but the infrastructure for "checkpointable" will stay constant.
> If it's too much right now, it will be way too much in future.
What have you seen in OpenVZ? Do new things that are not checkpointable
pop up very often?
-- Dave
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-05 22:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-05 16:38 [RFC][PATCH 00/11] track files for checkpointability Dave Hansen
2009-03-05 16:38 ` [RFC][PATCH 01/11] kill '_data' in cr_hdr_fd_data name Dave Hansen
2009-03-05 16:38 ` [RFC][PATCH 02/11] breakout fdinfo sprintf() into its own function Dave Hansen
2009-03-05 16:39 ` [RFC][PATCH 03/11] Introduce generic_file_checkpoint() Dave Hansen
2009-03-05 16:39 ` [RFC][PATCH 04/11] actually use f_op in checkpoint code Dave Hansen
2009-03-05 16:39 ` [RFC][PATCH 05/11] add generic checkpoint f_op to ext fses Dave Hansen
2009-03-13 2:50 ` Oren Laadan
2009-03-05 16:39 ` [RFC][PATCH 06/11] add checkpoint_file_generic() to /proc Dave Hansen
2009-03-05 16:39 ` [RFC][PATCH 07/11] file c/r: expose functions to query fs support Dave Hansen
2009-03-05 16:39 ` [RFC][PATCH 08/11] expose file checkpointability and reasoning in /proc Dave Hansen
2009-03-05 16:39 ` [RFC][PATCH 09/11] check files for checkpointability Dave Hansen
2009-03-09 17:38 ` Matt Helsley
2009-03-12 19:14 ` Dave Hansen
2009-03-05 16:39 ` [RFC][PATCH 10/11] add checkpoint/restart compile helper Dave Hansen
2009-03-05 16:39 ` [RFC][PATCH 11/11] optimize c/r check in dup_fd() Dave Hansen
2009-03-05 17:40 ` [RFC][PATCH 00/11] track files for checkpointability Alexey Dobriyan
2009-03-05 19:16 ` Dave Hansen
2009-03-05 21:08 ` Alexey Dobriyan
2009-03-05 21:27 ` Dave Hansen
2009-03-05 22:00 ` Alexey Dobriyan
2009-03-05 22:24 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2009-03-06 14:34 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-03-06 15:48 ` Dave Hansen
2009-03-06 16:23 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-03-06 16:46 ` Dave Hansen
2009-03-06 18:24 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-03-06 19:42 ` Dave Hansen
2009-03-13 3:05 ` Oren Laadan
2009-03-06 15:08 ` Greg Kurz
2009-03-06 15:35 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-03-06 17:36 ` Cedric Le Goater
2009-03-06 18:30 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-03-11 7:51 ` Cedric Le Goater
2009-03-12 15:30 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-03-13 6:36 ` Ensuring c/r maintainability (WAS Re: [RFC][PATCH 00/11] track files for checkpointability) Matt Helsley
2009-03-13 17:53 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-03-05 19:44 ` [RFC][PATCH 00/11] track files for checkpointability Dave Hansen
2009-03-05 18:13 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-03-05 18:16 ` Dave Hansen
2009-03-10 15:57 ` Nathan Lynch
2009-03-10 16:00 ` Nathan Lynch
2009-03-10 16:23 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-03-10 16:20 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-03-10 17:23 ` Nathan Lynch
2009-03-10 17:45 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2009-03-10 17:47 ` Dave Hansen
2009-03-10 16:22 ` 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=1236291865.22399.139.camel@nimitz \
--to=dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
--cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/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