* Oren Laadan or...@cs.columbia.edu wrote:
3 Clone with pid:
To restart processes from userspace, there needs to be a way to
request a specific pid--in the current pid_ns--for the child
process (clearly, if it isn't in use).
Why is it a disadvantage ? to Linus, a syscall
Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Oren Laadan or...@cs.columbia.edu wrote:
3 Clone with pid:
To restart processes from userspace, there needs to be a way to
request a specific pid--in the current pid_ns--for the child
process (clearly, if it isn't in use).
Why is it a disadvantage ? to Linus, a
Quoting Oren Laadan (or...@cs.columbia.edu):
For #1, we need to create a new container to begin with. This already
requires CAP_SYS_ADMIN. Yes, for now we can use some setuid() to create
a new pid_ns and then do the restart.
This is why I like tagging a pidns with a userid, and requiring that
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 11:43:30PM -0400, Oren Laadan wrote:
For checkpoint/restart (c/r) we need a method to (re)create the tasks
tree during restart. There are basically two approaches: in userspace
(zap approach) or in the kernel (openvz approach).
Once tasks have been created both
1) somebody should write registers before final jump to userspace.
Task itself can't generally do it: struct pt_regs is in the same place
as kernel stack.
cr_load_cpu_regs() does exactly this: as current writes to it's own
pt_regs. Oren, why don't you see crashes?
I first
Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 11:43:30PM -0400, Oren Laadan wrote:
For checkpoint/restart (c/r) we need a method to (re)create the tasks
tree during restart. There are basically two approaches: in userspace
(zap approach) or in the kernel (openvz approach).
Once tasks have
In the end correctness of chopping will be equal to how good user
understands that two task_struct's are independent of each other.
But it will still be a useful tool for many use cases, like batch cpu jobs,
some servers, vnc sessions (if you want graphics) etc. Imagine you run
Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
In the end correctness of chopping will be equal to how good user
understands that two task_struct's are independent of each other.
But it will still be a useful tool for many use cases, like batch cpu jobs,
some servers, vnc sessions (if you want graphics) etc.
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 04:10:53PM -0400, Oren Laadan wrote:
Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
In the end correctness of chopping will be equal to how good user
understands that two task_struct's are independent of each other.
But it will still be a useful tool for many use cases, like batch cpu
