Re: What can OpenVZ do?

[Serge E. Hallyn]

Quoting Eric W. Biederman (ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx):
> Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> > On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 12:45:03PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >> 
> >> * Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> 
> >> > On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 11:27:32AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >> > > Merging checkpoints instead might give them the incentive to get
> >> > > their act together.
> >> > 
> >> > Knowing how much time it takes to beat CPT back into usable shape every time
> >> > big kernel rebase is done, OpenVZ/Virtuozzo have every single damn incentive
> >> > to have CPT mainlined.
> >> 
> >> So where is the bottleneck? I suspect the effort in having forward ported
> >> it across 4 major kernel releases in a single year is already larger than
> >> the technical effort it would  take to upstream it. Any unreasonable upstream 
> >> resistence/passivity you are bumping into?
> >
> > People were busy with netns/containers stuff and OpenVZ/Virtuozzo bugs.
> 
> Yes.  Getting the namespaces particularly the network namespace finished
> has consumed a lot of work.
> 
> Then we have a bunch of people helping with ill conceived patches that seem
> to wear out the patience of people upstream.  Al, Greg kh, Linus.
> 
> The whole recent ressurection of the question of we should have a clone
> with pid syscall.

/me points

Alexey started it :)

But, Linus asks to start with simple checkpoint/restart patches.  Oren's
basic patchset pretty much does that, though, right?  Patches 1-7 just
do a basic single task.  8-10 add simple open files.  11, 13 and 14 do
external checkpoint and multiple tasks.

Are these an ok place to start, or do these need to be simplified even
more?

-serge
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/