Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote: > Daniel Lezcano [[email protected]] wrote: >>> +find_cinit_pid(const char *name) >>> { >>> + struct lxc_command command = { >>> + .request = { .type = LXC_COMMAND_CINIT_PID }, >>> + }; >>> + >>> + int ret, stopped; >>> + >>> + ret = lxc_command(name, &command, &stopped); >>> + if (ret < 0) { >>> + ERROR("failed to send command"); >>> + return -1; >>> + } >>> + >>> + ERROR("find_cinit_pid %d\n", command.answer.ret); >>> + >>> + return command.answer.ret; >>> +} >> I just committed the same function for the lxc_attach command. I think >> you can reuse it. > > Ok, will try to reuse it. > >>> +int lxc_checkpoint(const char *name, const char *statefile, int lxc_flags) >>> +{ >>> + int ret; >>> + int pid; >>> + int flags; >>> + struct stat statbuf; >>> + struct app_checkpoint_args crargs; >>> + >>> + if (access(statefile, F_OK) == 0) { >>> + ret = stat(statefile, &statbuf); >>> + if (ret < 0) { >>> + ERROR("stat(%s): %s\n", statefile, strerror(errno)); >>> + return -1; >>> + } >>> + >>> + if (S_ISDIR(statbuf.st_mode)) { >>> + ERROR("--directory option not implemented"); >>> + return -1; >>> + } else { >>> + ERROR("Checkpoint image file %s exists\n", statefile); >>> + return -1; >>> + } >>> + } >> For the checkpoint, you don't need to check if it's a directory or a >> file (but it should be done at restart time). > > I need to open() the statefile and pass its fd to app_checkpoint(). > If I don't check for directory, the open() below would fail, only > because of the O_RDWR flag. By checking, we could give a more useful > error message ?
What I meant is the directory shall not exists when checkpointing, if the directory or the file exists, the checkpoint should fail. >> I am not sure 'access' is >> really necessary because the O_EXCL is set in the open below. > > Agree. How about just the stat() and the error message ? IMO, just fail when trying to open the file, the O_EXCL flag will do the job for us. > Maybe later we could bury this code under say #ifdef USERCR so > if LXC is configured without USERCR, the current behavior is preserved ? Right, it's an aspect we have to address. But we can do that later, IMHO the main objective would be to correctly integrate lxc and the CR with the 'configure' script. eg configure --with-linux=<path> .... and the makefiles. _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] https://openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
