In commit 5571b126368c0153d73eaec0fdf43fbcbae67fd9 we bring
in the stabs for virtual terminals but they are race sensitive:
all therminals are represented by one per-VE @vz_tty_conm tty peer
which can be removed and set to nil if application ask for new
terminal when old one is inside "remove" stag
Maxim Patlasov writes:
> kaio_submit_alloc() sometimes piggybacks ploop request with additional work:
> set preq->prealloc_size, pass preq to fsync_thread, perform preallocation
> there, get it back to kaio_submit_alloc(), move preallocation from
> preq->prealloc_size to io->prealloced_size.
>
>
On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 02:36:59PM +0300, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> >
> > Agreed. VE_CONFIGURE_OPEN_TTY is special unfortunately (and could you
> > enlighten me a bit -- when console is attached, is it allowed to
> > do c/r in our pcs6, i somehow forget,
>
> You can attach to the console using `v
On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 02:01:57PM +0300, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 01:48:08PM +0300, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> > > Maybe let gather all ioctls we won't be able to escape using into
> > > one place and check what we can do?
> >
> > I don't think it's strictly necessary - we
On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 01:48:08PM +0300, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> > Maybe let gather all ioctls we won't be able to escape using into
> > one place and check what we can do?
>
> I don't think it's strictly necessary - we can do it in the course of
> porting old APIs. We just need to refine our p
On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 01:26:47PM +0300, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 12:55:41PM +0300, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> > Anyway, if it is difficult for criu to work with ioctls, we should
> > probably revise our policy. May be we could move all user API that needs
> > to be called
On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 12:55:41PM +0300, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 12:39:14PM +0300, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 12:30:46PM +0300, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> > > >
> > > > As to me ioctls on its own are not bad at all, but having some
> > > > native i
On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 12:39:14PM +0300, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 12:30:46PM +0300, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> > >
> > > As to me ioctls on its own are not bad at all, but having some
> > > native interface (such as we do with ve.X entries in cgroups)
> > > make it open for
On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 12:30:46PM +0300, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> >
> > As to me ioctls on its own are not bad at all, but having some
> > native interface (such as we do with ve.X entries in cgroups)
> > make it open for scripting at least: any new feature is a way
> > easier to test directly f
On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 03:52:41PM +0300, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 03:30:48PM +0300, Vladimir Davydov wrote:
> > Why are you so opposed to ioctls? Why did we start to move every piece
> > of our user API we could to ve cgroup in the first place? What's the
> > point in subs
10 matches
Mail list logo
