From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 13:41:33 -0700 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [RFC v7][PATCH 2/9] General infrastructure for checkpoint restart Message-Id: <20081021134133.f84151e9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20081021202410.GA10423@us.ibm.com> References: <1224481237-4892-1-git-send-email-orenl@cs.columbia.edu> <1224481237-4892-3-git-send-email-orenl@cs.columbia.edu> <20081021124130.a002e838.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20081021202410.GA10423@us.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: "Serge E. Hallyn" Cc: orenl@cs.columbia.edu, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com, mingo@elte.hu, hpa@zytor.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk List-ID: On Tue, 21 Oct 2008 15:24:10 -0500 "Serge E. Hallyn" wrote: > > I'd like to see the security guys take a real close look at all of > > this, and for them to do that effectively they should be provided with > > a full description of the security design of this feature. > > Right, some of the above should be spelled out somewhere. Should it be > in the patch description, in the Documentation/checkpoint.txt file, > or someplace else? Dupliction is usually bad. Documentation/checkpoint.txt would be good (although these things tend to go out of date fast). If you go that way, please ensure that the documentation patch is early in the series and that the changelog says "look in here before whining, dummy". -- 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: email@kvack.org