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    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans