Daniel Lezcano [daniel.lezc...@free.fr] wrote:
> Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
>> Daniel Lezcano [daniel.lezc...@free.fr] wrote:
>>
>>> But most of the simple test programs I run, exit right after the
>>> restart was marked successful instead of continuing their execution.
>>>
>>> In the kernel I
On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 18:37:10 -0500
"Serge E. Hallyn" wrote:
> Quoting Oren Laadan (or...@cs.columbia.edu):
> > Hi Andrew,
> >
> > Following up on the thread on the checkpoint-restart patch set
> > (http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/3/1/422), the following series is the
> > latest checkpoint/restart, base
Dan Smith wrote:
> OL> I think the default behavior of 'checkpoint' should be to not
> OL> chekcpoint net-ns, at the very least in the subtree-checkpoint
> OL> case.
>
> OL> I prefer the container case to also not include it by default.
>
> OL> These can be tuned in the 'checkpoint' utility, or
Quoting Oren Laadan (or...@cs.columbia.edu):
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Following up on the thread on the checkpoint-restart patch set
> (http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/3/1/422), the following series is the
> latest checkpoint/restart, based on 2.6.33.
>
> The first 20 patches are cleanups and prepartion for c/
Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
> Cedric Le Goater [...@fr.ibm.com] wrote:
>> Hello Suka,
>>
>> On 04/01/2010 03:55 AM, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
>>
>>> Resending patches after fixing whitespace damage and the typo in
>>> configure.ac. Add a section to patch-0 (below) to describe the
>>> kernel build
On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 01:31:39AM -0400, Oren Laadan wrote:
>
> Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > Quoting Oren Laadan (or...@cs.columbia.edu):
> >> I pulled all the recent patches in linux-cr (except for ipv6 fixup
> >> set), and created the following two branches:
> >>
> >> ckpt-v20-dev - patches appli
On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 14:10 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Nathan Lynch (n...@pobox.com):
> > On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 13:09 -0500, Nathan Lynch wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 09:17 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > > > Alas after I sent this Nathan reported trouble on x86. I haven't
> >
Quoting Nathan Lynch (n...@pobox.com):
> On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 13:09 -0500, Nathan Lynch wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 09:17 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > > Alas after I sent this Nathan reported trouble on x86. I haven't
> > > gotten a x86-32 partition running yet so can't reproduce. Does
On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 13:09 -0500, Nathan Lynch wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 09:17 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > Alas after I sent this Nathan reported trouble on x86. I haven't
> > gotten a x86-32 partition running yet so can't reproduce. Does
> > anyone else have x86-32 with f12 they can
On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 09:17 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Alas after I sent this Nathan reported trouble on x86. I haven't
> gotten a x86-32 partition running yet so can't reproduce. Does
> anyone else have x86-32 with f12 they can test on?
More detail on this. Seeing programs crash after res
Cedric Le Goater [...@fr.ibm.com] wrote:
> Hello Suka,
>
> On 04/01/2010 03:55 AM, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
>
>> Resending patches after fixing whitespace damage and the typo in
>> configure.ac. Add a section to patch-0 (below) to describe the
>> kernel build (commit-id, config tokens etc).
>
> w
BH> But devices that are not IFF_UP can still have addresses
BH> associated with them, wouldn't this cause those addresses to not
BH> be checkpointed?
Yes. This was discussed on IRC a bit as being a reasonable
compromise. Right now, there are several pernet devices that could
show up in a new ne
Quoting Brian Haley (brian.ha...@hp.com):
> Dan Smith wrote:
> > This makes the netns checkpoint code skip interfaces that are not up.
> > Later, we want to make it possible to checkpoint down interfaces with
> > a flag, but for now this helps prevent people from getting stuck on
> > stock kernels
Dan Smith wrote:
> This makes the netns checkpoint code skip interfaces that are not up.
> Later, we want to make it possible to checkpoint down interfaces with
> a flag, but for now this helps prevent people from getting stuck on
> stock kernels with various unsupported and persistent virtual inte
Quoting Michael H. Warfield (m...@wittsend.com):
> Running this in one container:
>
> mount -o remount,rw /srv/readonly
>
> (I seriously wish this would NOT WORK AT ALL, but it does. I don't want
> the container to be able to write to that partition at all, like the
> media was RO. Anybody have
Quoting Michael H. Warfield (m...@wittsend.com):
> Hey all,
>
> Been running into an ugly situation with LXC-Tools that seems to be
> pointing up a real serious leakage from containers. If you have a mount
> inside a container (presumably a bind mount in this case), if the
> container does a moun
Quoting Oren Laadan (or...@cs.columbia.edu):
>
> Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > Quoting Oren Laadan (or...@cs.columbia.edu):
> >> I pulled all the recent patches in linux-cr (except for ipv6 fixup
> >> set), and created the following two branches:
> >>
> >> ckpt-v20-dev - patches applied onto pof v20
Quoting Oren Laadan (or...@cs.columbia.edu):
>
> I already applied these with a mention in the changelog.
>
> I'm thinking of adding explcit CC: linuxfs-devel on ALL the
> patches which related to the FS ?
Definately.
-serge
___
Containers mailing lis
OL> I think the default behavior of 'checkpoint' should be to not
OL> chekcpoint net-ns, at the very least in the subtree-checkpoint
OL> case.
OL> I prefer the container case to also not include it by default.
OL> These can be tuned in the 'checkpoint' utility, or (better ?)
OL> by using CHECKPOI
Hey all,
Been running into an ugly situation with LXC-Tools that seems to be
pointing up a real serious leakage from containers. If you have a mount
inside a container (presumably a bind mount in this case), if the
container does a mount -o remount (say rw->ro or ro->rw) this propagates
to the ho
Hello Suka,
On 04/01/2010 03:55 AM, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
> Resending patches after fixing whitespace damage and the typo in
> configure.ac. Add a section to patch-0 (below) to describe the
> kernel build (commit-id, config tokens etc).
we plan to mergepatch 2,3,4 in lxc mainline real soon,
21 matches
Mail list logo
