Hi, in the kernel menuconfig, there should be a note, that CHECKPOINT_SUPPORT depends on Compat VDSO (Processor type and features --> Compad VDSO support). It took some time for me to find that out. :-) Regards, Ralph-Gordon Paul Am 26.03.2009 um 04:09 schrieb Nathan Lynch: > Dave Hansen <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Wed, 2009-03-25 at 18:02 -0500, Nathan Lynch wrote: >>> >>> diff --git a/checkpoint/Kconfig b/checkpoint/Kconfig >>> index e91e0fd..760c450 100644 >>> --- a/checkpoint/Kconfig >>> +++ b/checkpoint/Kconfig >>> @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ >>> config CHECKPOINT >>> bool "Enable checkpoint/restart (EXPERIMENTAL)" >>> - depends on (X86_32 || (S390 && 64BIT)) && EXPERIMENTAL >>> + depends on CHECKPOINT_SUPPORT && EXPERIMENTAL >>> help >>> Application checkpoint/restart is the ability to save the >>> state of a running application so that it can later resume >> >> Yeah, this is the right way to do it, very nice. > > Thanks Dave. > > >> Could we add a wee little ARCH_ prepend on 'CHECKPOINT_SUPPORT' in >> there? That way, people at least know where to go looking when they >> want to find out why it isn't enabled. > > You have a point, but I'd prefer to keep the name unchanged: > > * There doesn't seem to be a strong convention for putting the 'ARCH' > string in such symbols. Examples: LOCKDEP_SUPPORT, HAVE_KPROBES, > STACKTRACE_SUPPORT. Plenty of counter-examples, too, but there's no > standard practice AFAICT. > > * Making the string more verbose means people are more likely to get > it wrong e.g. CONFIG_CHECKPOINT_ARCH_SUPPORT (and this sort of thing > can go unnoticed for a while). > > * Implementers can grep or cscope for it and figure it out pretty > quickly, and they likely would do that anyway regardless of what it's > called. > > Prepending ARCH_ would imply the right things, but with a comment, we > can be explicit. > > > commit 07087d9295d1c4dcd7e79b19d70abf19370f59da > Author: Nathan Lynch <ntl@xxxxxxxxx> > Date: Wed Mar 25 21:32:30 2009 -0500 > > document CHECKPOINT_SUPPORT > > Make CHECKPOINT_SUPPORT's intended use clear with a comment in > checkpoint/Kconfig. > > Signed-off-by: Nathan Lynch <ntl@xxxxxxxxx> > > diff --git a/checkpoint/Kconfig b/checkpoint/Kconfig > index 760c450..1761b0a 100644 > --- a/checkpoint/Kconfig > +++ b/checkpoint/Kconfig > @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ > +# Architectures should define CHECKPOINT_SUPPORT when they have > +# implemented the hooks for processor state etc. needed by the > +# core checkpoint/restart code. > + > config CHECKPOINT > bool "Enable checkpoint/restart (EXPERIMENTAL)" > depends on CHECKPOINT_SUPPORT && EXPERIMENTAL > _______________________________________________ > Containers mailing list > Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers