[lkml]   [2008]   [Aug]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: checkpoint/restart ABI
    On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 23:47:49 +0200
    Arnd Bergmann <> wrote:

    > The other problem that you really need to solve is interface
    > stability. What you are creating is a binary representation
    > of many kernel internal data structures, so in our common
    > rules, you have to make sure that you remain forward and
    > backward compatible. Simply saying that you need to run
    > an identical kernel when restarting from a checkpoint is not
    > enough IMHO.

    OTOH, making one of these checkpoint files go into any 2.6.x kernel
    seems like a very high bar, to the point, perhaps, of killing this
    feature entirely.

    There could be a case for viewing sys_restore() as being a lot like
    sys_init_module() - a view into kernel internals that goes beyond the
    normal user-space ABI, and beyond the stability guarantee. It might be
    possible to create a certain amount of version portability with a
    modversions-like mechanism, but it sure seems hard to do better than


     \ /
      Last update: 2008-08-12 01:17    [W:0.037 / U:116.432 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site