Quoting Alexey Dobriyan (adobriyan@xxxxxxxxx): > On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 06:44:36PM -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > Quoting Alexey Dobriyan (adobriyan@xxxxxxxxx): > > > And since you guys showed that just idea of in-kernel checkpointing is not > > > rejected outright, it doesn't mean that you can drag every single idea too. > > > > Can you rephrase here? I have no idea what you mean by 'drag every single > > idea' > > complexity > +-|------------------------------------------------|----------------------|--> > hypervisor C/R in-kernel C/R C/R for unpriviledged > C/R with "leaks" > > I personally thought in-kernel C/R will be rejected outright, but it wasn't. > This in theory doesn't mean other two issues should be accepted. Note again that leaving c/R unprivileged was suggested (By Arnd) as a way to keep us on our toes. When it actually goes upstream I would prefer it be under a new CAP_CHECKPOINT_RESTART capability, not CAP_SYS_ADMIN. -serge _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
