Banning checkpoint (was: Re: What can OpenVZ do?)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



I think that all these efforts to abort checkpoint "intelligently" by
banning it early are completely misguided.

"Checkpointable" property isn't one-way ticket like "tainted" flag,
so doing it like tainted var isn't right, atomic or not, SMP-safe or
not.

With filesystems, one has ->f_op field to compare against banned
filesystems, one more flag isn't necessary.

Inotify isn't supported yet? You do

	if (!list_empty(&inode->inotify_watches))
		return -E;

without hooking into inotify syscalls.

ptrace(2) isn't supported -- look at struct task_struct::ptraced and
friends.

And so on.

System call (or whatever) does something with some piece of kernel
internals. We look at this "something" when walking data structures and
abort if it's scary enough.

Please, show at least one counter-example.
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers

[Index of Archives]     [Cgroups]     [Netdev]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux