Open main menu
Home
Random
Log in
Settings
About CRIU
Disclaimers
CRIU
Search
Changes
← Older edit
Newer edit →
History
(edit)
Revision as of 09:05, 5 March 2012
924 bytes added
,
09:05, 5 March 2012
no edit summary
Line 28:
Line 28:
eventually comes to tears and the project as a whole fails, it should
eventually comes to tears and the project as a whole fails, it should
be a simple matter to go through and delete all trace of it.
be a simple matter to go through and delete all trace of it.
+
* Andrew Morton starts to doubt in CRIU [https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/2/14/384 "link"]
+
Thus far our (my) approach has been to trickle the c/r support code
+
into mainline as it is developed. Under the assumption that the end
+
result will be acceptable and useful kernel code.
+
+
I'm afraid that I'm losing confidence in that approach. We have this
+
patchset, we have Stanislav's "IPC: checkpoint/restore in userspace
+
enhancements" (which apparently needs to get more complex to support
+
LSM context c/r). I simply *don't know* what additional patchsets are
+
expected. And from what you told me it sounds like networking support
+
is at a very early stage and I fear for what the end result of that
+
will look like.
+
+
So I don't feel that I can continue feeding these things into mainline
+
until someone can convince me that we won't have a nasty mess (and/or
+
an unsufficiently useful feature) at the end of the project.
Avagin
Bureaucrats
,
Administrators
416
edits