Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 26 Apr 2006 14:01:10 -0400 | From | Jeff Dike <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] PATCH 0/4 - Time virtualization |
| |
On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 02:25:00AM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > That patch should probably be separated, from the rest. > But it looks like a fairly sane idea.
Yeah, I'll keep these together for now, but the ptrace one is conceptually different from the rest.
> I think you missed a couple essential things to a time namespace. > Timers. The posix timers, in particular. The worst > of those is the monotonic timer.
Oops, thanks for pointing that out.
> In the case of migration the ugly case to properly handle is the > monotonic timer. That needs an offset yet it is absolutely forbidden > to provide that offset from the inside. So this is the one namespace > that I think is inappropriate to use sys_unshare to create. > We need a system call so that we can specify the minimum or the > starting monotonic time base.
For migration, it looks like the container will have to specify the time base at creation so that everything in it will have a consistent view of time if they get moved around.
So, maybe it belongs in clone as a "backwards" flag similar to CLONE_NEWNS.
Jeff - 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/
| |