On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 17:05 -0600, Matt Mackall wrote: > On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 14:57 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > > > Also, what happens if I checkpoint a process in 2.6.30 and restore it in > > > 2.6.31 which has an expanded idea of what should be restored? Do your > > > file formats handle this sort of forward compatibility or am I > > > restricted to one kernel? > > > > In general, you're restricted to one kernel. But, people have mentioned > > that, if the formats change, we should be able to write in-userspace > > converters for the checkpoint files. > > I mentioned this because it seems like a key use case is upgrading > kernels out from under long-lived applications. The key users as I envision it aren't really kernel hackers who are always running 2.6-next and running radically different kernels from moment to moment. :) Distros are pretty picky about changing things internal to the kernel during errata updates or even service packs. While that can be a pain for some of us developers trying to get features and fixes in, it is a godsend for trying to do something like process migration across an update. My random speculation would be that for things that if a kernel upgrade can be performed with ksplice (http://www.ksplice.com/) -- the original non-fancy version at least -- we can probably migrate across the upgrade. -- Dave -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
