On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 17:51 -0400, Oren Laadan wrote: > > Instead, how about a flag to sys_checkpoint() -- DO_RISKY_CHECKPOINT -- > > which checkpoints despite !may_checkpoint? > > I also agree with Matt - so we have a quorum :) > > so just to clarify: sys_checkpoint() is to fail (with what error ?) if the > deny-checkpoint test fails. > > however, if the user is risky, she can specify CR_CHECKPOINT_RISKY to force > an attempt to checkpoint as is. This sounds like an awful lot of policy to determine *inside* the kernel. Everybody is going to have a different definition of risky, so this scheme will work for approximately 5 minutes until it gets patched. :) Is it possible to enhance our interface such that users might have some kind of choice on these matters? -- Dave _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
