[lkml]   [2010]   [Nov]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [Ksummit-2010-discuss] checkpoint-restart: naked patch
On Sat, 6 Nov 2010, Matt Helsley wrote:

> Yes, our patches touch a wide variety of kernel code. You have just failed
> to appreciate how "wide" the kernel ABI truly is. You can't really count
> it by number of syscalls, number of pseudo-filesystems, etc. There's
> also the intended behavior of those interfaces to consider. Each piece
> of checkpoint/restart code is relatively self-contained. This can be
> confirmed merely by looking at many of the patches we've already posted
> enabling checkpoint/restart of that feature. Until you've tried to
> implement checkpoint/restart for an interface or until you've bothered
> to review a patch for one of them (my favorite on is eventfd:
> ) please
> don't tell us it's too complex. Then compare that with your proposed
> ghastly stack of userspace cards -- ptrace (really more like strace) +
> LD_PRELOAD + a daemon...
> Incidentally, 20k lines of code is less than many pieces of the kernel.
> It's less than many:
> Filesystems (I've selected ones designed for rotating media or networks usually..)
> ext4, nfs, ocfs2, xfs, reiserfs, ntfs, gfs2, jfs, cifs, ubifs, nilfs2, btrfs
> Non-filesystem file-system support code:
> nfsd, nls
> It's less than one of the simpler DRM graphics drivers -- i915:
> $ cd drivers/gpu/drm/i915
> $ wc -l *.[ch]
> ...
> 41481 total
> It's less than any one of the lpfc, bfa, aic7xxx, qla2xxx, and mpt2sas
> drivers I see under scsi. Perhaps a more fair comparison might be to compare
> a single driver to a single checkpointable kernel interface but it's
> a more-fair comparison that skews even more in our favor.

Please, do not compare things like single file systems, drivers, or
otherwise fairly isolated components, with this "thing".
This thing touches a freaky-large number of subsystems, effectively
adding a glueage between them, which can might end up causing problems
(and/or restrict design choices) in the future.
The naked patch looks like just a sugar coating to me, which left out 300+
lines of extra logic in epoll alone.
This is one of the widest, deepest, intrusive patches I have seen in a
while, whose inclusion would require a little bit more than handwaving and
continuous re-posting IMO.

- Davide

 \ /
  Last update: 2010-11-08 00:03    [W:0.132 / U:5.704 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site