Oren Laadan wrote: > Hi, > > Just got back from 3 weeks with practically no internet, and I see > that I missed a big party ! > > Trying to catch up with what's been said so far -- [...] >>>> >>>> - Will any of this involve non-trivial serialisation of kernel >>>> objects? If so, that's getting into the >>>> unacceptably-expensive-to-maintain space, I suspect. >>> We have some structures that are certainly tied to the kernel-internal >>> ones. However, we are certainly *not* simply writing kernel structures >>> to userspace. We could do that with /dev/mem. We are carefully pulling >>> out the minimal bits of information from the kernel structures that we >>> *need* to recreate the function of the structure at restart. There is a >>> maintenance burden here but, so far, that burden is almost entirely in >>> checkpoint/*.c. We intend to test this functionality thoroughly to >>> ensure that we don't regress once we have integrated it. >> I guess my question can be approximately simplified to: "will it end up >> looking like openvz"? (I don't believe that we know of any other way >> of implementing this?) >> >> Because if it does then that's a concern, because my assessment when I >> looked at that code (a number of years ago) was that having code of >> that nature in mainline would be pretty costly to us, and rather >> unwelcome. > > I originally implemented c/r for linux as as kernel module, without > requiring any changes from the kernel. (Doing the namespaces as a kernel > module was much harder). For more details, see: > https://www.ncl.cs.columbia.edu/research/migrate oops... I meant the following link: http://www.ncl.cs.columbia.edu/research/migration/ see, for example, the papers from DejaView (SOSP 07) and Zap (USENIX 07). Oren. -- 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
