Dave Hansen wrote: > On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 18:22 +0200, Cedric Le Goater wrote: >> I would be in favor of adding a new c/r signal like other operating systems >> have done today and in the past. This is something to discuss. > > There was some talk of doing a new signal for CPU hotplug. But, that > was shot down because it really requires library changes to work right. > But, would this signal be completely kernel handled? What good is > having a signal if userspace *isn't* going to handle it ever? There are 2 reasons for such a signal. The first is to be able to freeze a group of tasks before checkpointing it. the swsusp freezer does that already, with a stealth signal by faking it. The second is to be able to run some code in the context of the current task. There's plenty of simple ways to get/set process and kernel states through syscalls. Why not use them ? Of course, we cannot do everything in user and, whenever needed ,we would use a kernel helper. memory is one requiring a big helper (swap). It would also require to have a user space handler in some lib. I'd like to address that topic at the C/R bof. Thanks, C. _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
