lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Apr]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 05/10] Core checkpoint/restart support code
From
Date
On Mon, 2011-04-04 at 10:10 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Nathan Lynch (ntl@pobox.com):
> > On Sun, 2011-04-03 at 14:03 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > > Quoting ntl@pobox.com (ntl@pobox.com):
> > > > Only a pid namespace init task - the child process produced by a call
> > > > to clone(2) with CLONE_NEWPID - is allowed to call these. The state
> > >
> > > So you make this useful for your cases by only using this with
> > > application containers - created using lxc-execute, or, more precisely,
> > > using lxc-init as the container's init. So a container running a stock
> > > distro can't be checkpointed.
> >
> > Correct, a conventional distro init won't work, and application
> > containers are my focus for now, at least.
> >
> >
> > > Is this just to keep the patch simple for now, or is there some reason
> > > to keep this limitation in place?
> >
> > I guess you're asking whether non-pid-init processes could be allowed to
> > use the syscalls?
>
> No. I'm asking whether you are intending to later on change the checkpoint
> API to allow an external task to checkpoint a pid-init process, rather than
> the pid-init process having to initiate it itself.

No, that is not the intention. I can see how that would be problematic
for those wanting to run minimally-modified distro containers, but I
think running a patched pid-init is a reasonable tradeoff to ask users
to make in order to get c/r. And there's nothing to keep the standard
distro inits from growing c/r capability.




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-04-04 17:43    [W:0.092 / U:0.268 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site