Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 15 Nov 2005 13:41:28 -0600 | From | "Serge E. Hallyn" <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] [PATCH 00/13] Introduce task_pid api |
| |
Quoting Ray Bryant (raybry@mpdtxmail.amd.com): > On Monday 14 November 2005 15:23, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > -- > > > > I'm part of a project implementing checkpoint/restart processes. > > After a process or group of processes is checkpointed, killed, and > > restarted, the changing of pids could confuse them. There are many > > other such issues, but we wanted to start with pids. > > > > I've read through the rest of this thread, but it seems to me that the real > problems are in the basic assumptions you are making that are driving the > rest of this effort and perhaps we should be examining those assumptions > instead of your patch.
Ok.
> For example, from what I've read (particularly Hubertus's post that the pid > could be in a register), I'm inferring that what you want to do is to be able > to checkpoint/restart an arbitrary process at an arbitrary time and without > any special support for checkpoint/restart in that process.
Yes.
> Also (c. f. Dave Hansen's post on the number of Xen virtual machines > required), you appear to think that the number of processes on the system > for which checkpoint/restart should be enabled is large (more or less the > same as the number of processes on the system).
Right.
> Am I reading this correctly?
As far as I can see, yes.
-serge - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |