lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Oct]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] Track in-kernel when we expect checkpoint/restart to work
    Quoting Greg Kurz (gkurz@fr.ibm.com):
    > On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 11:18 -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:
    > > Greg Kurz wrote:
    > >
    > > > This flag is weak... testing it gives absolutly no hint whether the
    > > > checkpoint may succeed or not. As it is designed now, a user can only be
    > > > aware that checkpoint is *forever* denied. I agree that it's only useful
    > > > as a "flexible CR todo list".
    > >
    > > I don't think it's true that it gives "absolutly no hint".
    > >
    > > If the flag is not set, then checkpoint will succeed, right? Whereas if
    >
    > Wrong. Unless you test_and_checkpoint atomically, the flag doesn't help.

    Atomically wrt what? Presumably you test and checkpoint while the
    container is frozen...

    > > the flag is set, then it's an indication that checkpoint could fail (but
    > > may still succeed if whatever condition caused the flag to be set is no
    > > longer true).
    > >
    > > Chris
    > >
    > --
    > Gregory Kurz gkurz@fr.ibm.com
    > Software Engineer @ IBM/Meiosys http://www.ibm.com
    > Tel +33 (0)534 638 479 Fax +33 (0)561 400 420
    >
    > "Anarchy is about taking complete responsibility for yourself."
    > Alan Moore.
    >
    > _______________________________________________
    > Containers mailing list
    > Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
    > https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-10-13 18:49    [W:0.022 / U:0.524 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site