Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote: > Serge E. Hallyn [serge@xxxxxxxxxx] wrote: > | > | If a container at pidns level 2, with 1 more pidns underneath it, > | is checkpointed, then the checkpoint image should only reflect > | the base and child pidns. The two ancestor pidns levels should > | not be there. > > Agree. I meant to say that we would need to specify more than 2 > pids when checkpoint/restarting apps with deeply nested namespaces > if any :-) Just like the checkpoint image should only reflect the nesting from some base down, clone_with_pid() should reflect nesting from some base down. (Hmm.. ignore this if it is what you meant already ...) > > Specifying bottom-up may solve the problem I guess. Perhaps bottom-up is a misleading: I don't care about the order... I meant that a N size array should affect the last N levels of the hierarchy (if it is deeper than N). Oren. _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
