On Tue, 2009-06-23 at 10:02 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > Quoting Subrata Modak ([email protected]): > > On Wed, 2009-03-18 at 19:33 +0530, Subrata Modak wrote: > > > Thanks Serge. > > > > > > On Wed, 2009-03-18 at 08:39 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > > > Quoting Subrata Modak ([email protected]): > > > > > Serge, > > > > > > > > > > Did i talk to you regarding these tests in our OLS 2008 meeting ? I do > > > > > not remember exactly, but, when i saw this posting, i thought may be > > > > > there was some conversation. > > > > > > > > I'm not sure. However no patches are in -mm or linux-next yet. > > > > > > > > I'm not yet certain what the test methodology will be. Some for > > > > instance feel that the best way to test c/r is to just run ltp > > > > inside a container and continuously c/r it. Of course, that > > > > isn't very useful when c/r support is not yet sufficient to > > > > accomplish that. So at the moment we do have sets of programs > > > > specifically written to be checkpointable. > > > > > > > > For instance I have a program and script which continuously > > > > runs, updates state, writes to a file, checkpoints, kills, > > > > and restarts. That sort of thing should make a nice testcase. > > > > Oren maintains a git tree with checkpointable programs at > > > > git://git.ncl.cs.columbia.edu/pub/git/user-cr.git . > > > > > > > > So definately let's talk again after patches hit mainline. I'll > > > > whip up some testcases based on existing code. > > > > Serge, > > > > Do we have this in 2.6.30 ? > > Let me check! > > Heh, just kidding. Nope.
So, i can expect LTP-mm patches from you in future ;-) Regards-- Subrata > > -serge ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
