From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Oren Laadan <orenl@cs.columbia.edu>
Cc: dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com, arnd@arndb.de, jeremy@goop.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v4][PATCH 3/9] x86 support for checkpoint/restart
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 10:17:13 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080909081713.GA18946@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1220946154-15174-4-git-send-email-orenl@cs.columbia.edu>
* Oren Laadan <orenl@cs.columbia.edu> wrote:
> + /* for checkpoint in process context (from within a container)
> + the GS and FS registers should be saved from the hardware;
> + otherwise they are already sabed on the thread structure */
please use the correct comment style consistently throughout your
patches. The correct one is like this one:
> + /*
> + * for checkpoint in process context (from within a container),
> + * the actual syscall is taking place at this very moment; so
> + * we (optimistically) subtitute the future return value (0) of
> + * this syscall into the orig_eax, so that upon restart it will
> + * succeed (or it will endlessly retry checkpoint...)
> + */
incorrect/inconsistent ones are like these:
> + /* normally, no need to unlazy_fpu(), since TS_USEDFPU flag
> + * have been cleared when task was conexted-switched out...
> + * except if we are in process context, in which case we do */
> + /* restore TLS by hand: why convert to struct user_desc if
> + * sys_set_thread_entry() will convert it back ? */
> + /* FIX: add sanity checks (eg. that values makes
> + * sense, that we don't overwrite old values, etc */
(and there's many more examples throughout the series)
> +int cr_read_cpu_debug(struct cr_hdr_cpu *hh, struct task_struct *t)
> +{
> + /* debug regs */
> +
> + preempt_disable();
> +
> + if (hh->uses_debug) {
> + set_debugreg(hh->debugreg0, 0);
> + set_debugreg(hh->debugreg1, 1);
> + /* ignore 4, 5 */
> + set_debugreg(hh->debugreg2, 2);
> + set_debugreg(hh->debugreg3, 3);
> + set_debugreg(hh->debugreg6, 6);
> + set_debugreg(hh->debugreg7, 7);
> + }
> +
> + preempt_enable();
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
hm, the preemption disabling seems pointless here. What does it protect
against?
> +++ b/checkpoint/ckpt_arch.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
> +#include <linux/ckpt.h>
> +
> +int cr_write_thread(struct cr_ctx *ctx, struct task_struct *t);
> +int cr_write_cpu(struct cr_ctx *ctx, struct task_struct *t);
> +
> +int cr_read_thread(struct cr_ctx *ctx);
> +int cr_read_cpu(struct cr_ctx *ctx);
please add 'extern' to prototypes in include files.
> @@ -15,6 +15,8 @@
> #include <linux/ckpt.h>
> #include <linux/ckpt_hdr.h>
>
> +#include "ckpt_arch.h"
> +
plsdntuseannyngabbrvtsngnrcd. [1]
"checkpoint_" should be just fine in most cases.
Ingo
[1] (please dont use annoying abbreviations in generic code)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-09-09 8:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-09-09 7:42 [RFC v4][PATCH 0/9] Kernel based checkpoint/restart` Oren Laadan
2008-09-09 7:42 ` [RFC v4][PATCH 1/9] Create syscalls: sys_checkpoint, sys_restart Oren Laadan
2008-09-09 7:42 ` [RFC v4][PATCH 2/9] General infrastructure for checkpoint restart Oren Laadan
2008-09-10 6:10 ` MinChan Kim
2008-09-10 18:36 ` Oren Laadan
2008-09-10 22:54 ` MinChan Kim
2008-09-11 6:44 ` Oren Laadan
2008-09-09 7:42 ` [RFC v4][PATCH 3/9] x86 support for checkpoint/restart Oren Laadan
2008-09-09 8:17 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2008-09-09 23:23 ` Oren Laadan
2008-09-09 7:42 ` [RFC v4][PATCH 4/9] Memory management (dump) Oren Laadan
2008-09-09 9:22 ` Vegard Nossum
2008-09-10 7:51 ` MinChan Kim
2008-09-10 23:49 ` MinChan Kim
2008-09-10 16:55 ` Dave Hansen
2008-09-10 17:45 ` Dave Hansen
2008-09-10 18:28 ` Oren Laadan
2008-09-10 21:03 ` Cleanups for [PATCH " Dave Hansen
2008-09-10 21:38 ` [RFC v4][PATCH " Dave Hansen
2008-09-12 16:57 ` Dave Hansen
2008-09-09 7:42 ` [RFC v4][PATCH 5/9] Memory managemnet (restore) Oren Laadan
2008-09-09 16:07 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2008-09-09 23:35 ` Oren Laadan
2008-09-10 15:00 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2008-09-10 19:31 ` Dave Hansen
2008-09-10 19:48 ` Oren Laadan
2008-09-10 20:49 ` Dave Hansen
2008-09-11 6:59 ` Oren Laadan
2008-09-09 7:42 ` [RFC v4][PATCH 6/9] Checkpoint/restart: initial documentation Oren Laadan
2008-09-10 7:13 ` MinChan Kim
2008-09-09 7:42 ` [RFC v4][PATCH 7/9] Infrastructure for shared objects Oren Laadan
2008-09-09 7:42 ` [RFC v4][PATCH 8/9] File descriprtors (dump) Oren Laadan
2008-09-09 8:06 ` Vegard Nossum
2008-09-09 8:23 ` Vegard Nossum
2008-09-10 2:01 ` Oren Laadan
2008-09-11 5:02 ` MinChan Kim
2008-09-11 6:37 ` Oren Laadan
2008-09-09 7:42 ` [RFC v4][PATCH 9/9] File descriprtors (restore) Oren Laadan
2008-09-09 16:26 ` Dave Hansen
2008-09-10 1:49 ` Oren Laadan
2008-09-10 16:09 ` Dave Hansen
2008-09-10 18:55 ` Oren Laadan
2008-09-09 18:06 ` [RFC v4][PATCH 0/9] Kernel based checkpoint/restart` 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=20080909081713.GA18946@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=orenl@cs.columbia.edu \
/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