From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f72.google.com (mail-wm0-f72.google.com [74.125.82.72]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20D3E6B0253 for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 09:59:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-wm0-f72.google.com with SMTP id m139so38523282wma.0 for ; Thu, 01 Sep 2016 06:59:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lf0-x242.google.com (mail-lf0-x242.google.com. [2a00:1450:4010:c07::242]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id h127si2909697lfd.308.2016.09.01.06.59.22 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 01 Sep 2016 06:59:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf0-x242.google.com with SMTP id 33so4170921lfw.3 for ; Thu, 01 Sep 2016 06:59:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 16:59:20 +0300 From: Cyrill Gorcunov Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 6/6] x86/signal: add SA_{X32,IA32}_ABI sa_flags Message-ID: <20160901135920.GL23045@uranus.lan> References: <20160831135936.2281-1-dsafonov@virtuozzo.com> <20160831135936.2281-7-dsafonov@virtuozzo.com> <20160901122744.GA7438@redhat.com> <20160901124522.GK23045@uranus.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454c46@gmail.com> Cc: Oleg Nesterov , Dmitry Safonov , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andy Lutomirski , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , Ingo Molnar , linux-mm@kvack.org, X86 ML , Pavel Emelyanov On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 04:47:23PM +0300, Dmitry Safonov wrote: > Thanks for your replies Oleg, Cyrill, > > 2016-09-01 15:45 GMT+03:00 Cyrill Gorcunov : > > On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 02:27:44PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > >> > Hi Oleg, > >> > can I have your acks or reviewed-by tags for 4-5-6 patches in the series, > >> > or there is something left to fix? > >> > >> Well yes... Although let me repeat, I am not sure I personally like > >> the very idea of 3/6 and 6/6. But as I already said I do not feel I > >> understand the problem space enough, so I won't argue. > >> > >> However, let me ask again. Did you consider another option? Why criu > >> can't exec a dummy 32-bit binary before anything else? > > > > I'm not really sure how this would look then. If I understand you > > correctly you propose to exec dummy 32bit during "forking" stage > > where we're recreating a process tree, before anything else. If > > true this implies that we will need two criu engines: one compiled > > with 64 bit and (same) second but compiled with 32 bits, no? > > Yep, we would need then full CRIU, but compiled in 32 bits. > And it can be then even more complicated, as 64-bit parent > can have 32-bit child, which can have 64-bit child... et cetera. Yup, this gonna be a mess, that's why I asked, because I suspect Oleg meant something else maybe? -- 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