On 06/09/2010 07:29 PM, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
Michel Normand [norm...@fr.ibm.com] wrote:
| Le mardi 08 juin 2010 à 19:07 -0700, Sukadev Bhattiprolu a écrit :
| I am not too sure, but if user wants to stop a container is there a
| reason not to implicitly unfreeze the container and stop
[Dan Smith pointed this out while testing out-of-tree lxc-checkpoint/restart]
MH Yup. Because it's frozen pending signals aren't delivered until after
MH the task is thawed.
Exactly, and Daniel said this was needed as well, so:
MH Acked-by: Matt Helsley matth...@us.ibm.com
Acked-by: Dan Smith
Michel Normand [norm...@fr.ibm.com] wrote:
| Le mardi 08 juin 2010 à 19:07 -0700, Sukadev Bhattiprolu a écrit :
| I am not too sure, but if user wants to stop a container is there a
| reason not to implicitly unfreeze the container and stop ?
|
| ---
| From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu
I am not too sure, but if user wants to stop a container is there a
reason not to implicitly unfreeze the container and stop ?
---
From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu suka...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 18:42:00 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 1/1]: unfreeze while stopping container
When a container is
