From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965110AbWD1Ldq (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Apr 2006 07:33:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965145AbWD1Ldq (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Apr 2006 07:33:46 -0400 Received: from smtp005.mail.ukl.yahoo.com ([217.12.11.36]:45238 "HELO smtp005.mail.ukl.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S965110AbWD1Ldq (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Apr 2006 07:33:46 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.it; h=Received:From:To:Subject:Date:User-Agent:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Disposition:Message-Id; b=4Y+USFw97dSZljSXttWdgcw11ZcXuZcOh+1S2dQod+ORrLhF5pX5+NNGUE998pCShNOPjCOB3b/d8SlYJnpwozaL+PRB9UHCWAfVP1nrtWUrVMryrzTwYg4UEvXp2pXq/ogN0sZb2R7EWUCPQwMBmNglsvyaaLqZoxVgBq0JmaU= ; From: Blaisorblade To: user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [uml-devel] Re: [RFC] PATCH 0/4 - Time virtualization Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 13:33:40 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.3 Cc: Jeff Dike , "Eric W. Biederman" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <200604131719.k3DHJcZG004674@ccure.user-mode-linux.org> <20060426180110.GB8142@ccure.user-mode-linux.org> In-Reply-To: <20060426180110.GB8142@ccure.user-mode-linux.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200604281333.41358.blaisorblade@yahoo.it> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wednesday 26 April 2006 20:01, Jeff Dike wrote: > On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 02:25:00AM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > In the case of migration the ugly case to properly handle is the > > monotonic timer. That needs an offset yet it is absolutely forbidden > > to provide that offset from the inside. So this is the one namespace > > that I think is inappropriate to use sys_unshare to create. > > We need a system call so that we can specify the minimum or the > > starting monotonic time base. > For migration, it looks like the container will have to specify the > time base at creation so that everything in it will have a consistent > view of time if they get moved around. > So, maybe it belongs in clone as a "backwards" flag similar to > CLONE_NEWNS. I must note that currently every (?) flag allowed for unshare is also allowed for clone, so you need to do that anyway. -- Inform me of my mistakes, so I can keep imitating Homer Simpson's "Doh!". Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade (Skype ID "PaoloGiarrusso", ICQ 215621894) http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade Chiacchiera con i tuoi amici in tempo reale! http://it.yahoo.com/mail_it/foot/*http://it.messenger.yahoo.com