From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Oren Laadan <orenl@cs.columbia.edu>
Cc: containers@lists.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Serge Hallyn <serue@us.ibm.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
MinChan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>,
arnd@arndb.de, jeremy@goop.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v6][PATCH 0/9] Kernel based checkpoint/restart
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2008 14:46:58 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081009124658.GE2952@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1223461197-11513-1-git-send-email-orenl@cs.columbia.edu>
* Oren Laadan <orenl@cs.columbia.edu> wrote:
> These patches implement basic checkpoint-restart [CR]. This version
> (v6) supports basic tasks with simple private memory, and open files
> (regular files and directories only). Changes mainly cleanups. See
> original announcements below.
i'm wondering about the following productization aspect: it would be
very useful to applications and users if they knew whether it is safe to
checkpoint a given app. I.e. whether that app has any state that cannot
be stored/restored yet.
Once we can do that, if the kernel can reliably tell whether it can
safely checkpoint an application, we could start adding a kernel driven
self-test of sorts: a self-propelled kernel feature that would
transparently try to checkpoint various applications as it goes, and
restore them immediately.
When such a test-kernel is booted then all that should be visible is an
occasional slowdown due to the random save/restore cycles of various
processes - but no actual application breakage should ever occur, and
the kernel must not crash either. This would work a bit like
CONFIG_RCUTORTURE: a constant test that should be transparent in terms
of functionality.
Also, the ability to tell whether a process can be safely checkpointed
would allow apps to rely on it - they cannot accidentally use some
kernel feature that is not saved/restored and then lose state across a
CR cycle.
Plus, as a bonus, the inability to CR a given application would sure
spur the development of proper checkpointing of that given kernel state.
We could print some once-per-boot debug warning about exactly what bit
cannot be checkpointed yet. This would create proper pressure from
actual users of CR.
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-10-09 12:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-08 10:19 Oren Laadan
2008-10-08 10:19 ` [RFC v6][PATCH 1/9] Create syscalls: sys_checkpoint, sys_restart Oren Laadan
2008-10-08 10:19 ` [RFC v6][PATCH 2/9] General infrastructure for checkpoint restart Oren Laadan
2008-10-08 10:19 ` [RFC v6][PATCH 3/9] x86 support for checkpoint/restart Oren Laadan
2008-10-10 10:21 ` Cedric Le Goater
2008-10-10 10:24 ` Oren Laadan
2008-10-08 10:19 ` [RFC v6][PATCH 4/9] Dump memory address space Oren Laadan
2008-10-08 10:19 ` [RFC v6][PATCH 5/9] Restore " Oren Laadan
2008-10-08 15:35 ` Dave Hansen
2008-10-08 10:19 ` [RFC v6][PATCH 6/9] Checkpoint/restart: initial documentation Oren Laadan
2008-10-08 10:19 ` [RFC v6][PATCH 7/9] Infrastructure for shared objects Oren Laadan
2008-10-08 10:19 ` [RFC v6][PATCH 8/9] Dump open file descriptors Oren Laadan
2008-10-08 10:19 ` [RFC v6][PATCH 9/9] Restore open file descriprtors Oren Laadan
2008-10-09 12:46 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2008-10-09 12:58 ` [RFC v6][PATCH 0/9] Kernel based checkpoint/restart Dave Hansen
2008-10-09 13:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-09 13:34 ` Dave Hansen
2008-10-09 13:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-09 16:50 ` Dave Hansen
2008-10-10 15:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-13 8:13 ` Cedric Le Goater
2008-10-13 16:12 ` Oren Laadan
2008-10-15 15:13 ` Cedric Le Goater
2008-10-15 23:59 ` Oren Laadan
2008-10-13 16:43 ` Dave Hansen
2008-10-15 15:15 ` Cedric Le Goater
2008-10-16 0:06 ` Oren Laadan
2008-10-16 12:35 ` Daniel Lezcano
2008-10-16 13:49 ` Oren Laadan
2008-10-16 22:51 ` Peter Chubb
2008-10-17 6:30 ` David Newall
2008-10-20 17:17 ` Dave Hansen
2008-10-17 6:44 ` Cedric Le Goater
2008-10-17 7:08 ` Oren Laadan
2008-10-09 21:59 ` Greg Kurz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20081009124658.GE2952@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
--cc=orenl@cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=serue@us.ibm.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox