On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 17:05 -0600, Matt Mackall wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 14:57 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > > Also, what happens if I checkpoint a process in 2.6.30 and restore it in
> > > 2.6.31 which has an expanded idea of what should be restored? Do your
> > > file formats handle this so
On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 14:57 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > Also, what happens if I checkpoint a process in 2.6.30 and restore it in
> > 2.6.31 which has an expanded idea of what should be restored? Do your
> > file formats handle this sort of forward compatibility or am I
> > restricted to one kerne
On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 14:10 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 13:51:23 -0800
> Dave Hansen wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 11:42 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 13:30:35 -0600
> > > Matt Mackall wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 10:11 -0800, Dav
On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 13:30 -0600, Matt Mackall wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 10:11 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
...
> > * Filesystem state
> > * contents of files
> > * mount tree for individual processes
> > * flock
> > * threads and sessions
> > * CPU and NUMA affinity
> > * sys_remap_fil
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 01:51:23PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 11:42 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 13:30:35 -0600
> > Matt Mackall wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 10:11 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > >
> > > > > - In bullet-point form, what featu
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 13:51:23 -0800
Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 11:42 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 13:30:35 -0600
> > Matt Mackall wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 10:11 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > >
> > > > > - In bullet-point form, what features a
On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 11:42 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 13:30:35 -0600
> Matt Mackall wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 10:11 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> >
> > > > - In bullet-point form, what features are missing, and should be added?
> > >
> > > * support for more arch
Quoting Dave Hansen (d...@linux.vnet.ibm.com):
> Patch 12/14 is supposed to address this *concept*. But, it hasn't been
> carried through so that it currently works. My expectation was that we
> would go through and add things over time. I'll go make sure I push it
> to the point that it actuall
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 13:30:35 -0600
Matt Mackall wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 10:11 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
>
> > > - In bullet-point form, what features are missing, and should be added?
> >
> > * support for more architectures than i386
> > * file descriptors:
> > * sockets (network, A
On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 10:11 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > - In bullet-point form, what features are missing, and should be added?
>
> * support for more architectures than i386
> * file descriptors:
> * sockets (network, AF_UNIX, etc...)
> * devices files
> * shmfs, hugetlbfs
> * epoll
On Thu, 2009-02-12 at 10:17 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 09:05:47 -0800
> > Dave Hansen wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 2009-01-27 at 12:07 -0500, Oren Laadan wrote:
> > > > Checkpoint-restart (c/r): a couple of fixes in preparation for 64bit
> > > > arc
On Wed, 2009-02-11 at 14:14 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 09:05:47 -0800
> Dave Hansen wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2009-01-27 at 12:07 -0500, Oren Laadan wrote:
> > > Checkpoint-restart (c/r): a couple of fixes in preparation for 64bit
> > > architectures, and a couple of fixes for b
* Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 09:05:47 -0800
> Dave Hansen wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2009-01-27 at 12:07 -0500, Oren Laadan wrote:
> > > Checkpoint-restart (c/r): a couple of fixes in preparation for 64bit
> > > architectures, and a couple of fixes for bugss (comments from Serge
> >
13 matches
Mail list logo
