lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Aug]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: checkpoint/restart ABI
On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 23:47:49 +0200
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:

> The other problem that you really need to solve is interface
> stability. What you are creating is a binary representation
> of many kernel internal data structures, so in our common
> rules, you have to make sure that you remain forward and
> backward compatible. Simply saying that you need to run
> an identical kernel when restarting from a checkpoint is not
> enough IMHO.

OTOH, making one of these checkpoint files go into any 2.6.x kernel
seems like a very high bar, to the point, perhaps, of killing this
feature entirely.

There could be a case for viewing sys_restore() as being a lot like
sys_init_module() - a view into kernel internals that goes beyond the
normal user-space ABI, and beyond the stability guarantee. It might be
possible to create a certain amount of version portability with a
modversions-like mechanism, but it sure seems hard to do better than
that.

jon


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-08-12 01:17    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans