On Fri, 2008-07-11 at 09:38 -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > On Fri, 2008-07-11 at 08:13 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > > > One thing we could do here is to start extending the cryo approach > > with Eric's checkpoint-as-a-coredump (caac?). We generate the > > tiniest of coredumps which, at first, contains nothing but > > mm->arg_start and maybe a process id. It would be simplest if > > it also contained a filename for the real executable, > > The exec model sounds reasonable to me. > > But, I think the filename of the exe is going to have to be in the > checkpoint *already*. It is mapped by at least one of the VMAs, and > will probably be dumped as a normal file-backed area. Yes, the file that backed the exec will be there. Note that thanks to "stacking" filesystems the path to the file backing the exe is not _always_ going to be the same as the path to the file which userspace exec'd in the first place. You can see this by comparing the /proc/<pid>/exe symlink with the file backing the VMA. This is important to any program which checks the /proc/self/exe symlink to find out where it's installed (Java does this, for example). I think it's possible to do this with a binfmt -- it's just one more detail to remember. Cheers, -Matt _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
