Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/5] check files for checkpointability

[Dave Hansen]

On Tue, 2009-02-24 at 13:43 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Dave Hansen (dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx):
> > On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 19:10 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > > > This allows us to tell where and when we went wrong.  Take a process
> > > > that's been running for a month.  After 5 days it did something random
> > > > to keep it from being checkpointed.  You're going to have forgotten all
> > > > about it 25 days later.  This gives us an opportunity to spit into dmesg
> > > > or just plain log it.  It also gives the app some ability to reflect and
> > > > see what its uncheckpointable attributes are.  
> > > 
> > > Hmm.  In that case, rather than refuse checkpoint, I prefer that we make
> > > this a footnote in the /proc/$$/checkpointable output.
> > 
> > Yeah, that's cool.  If we were smart, we'd also get hooked into some of
> > the ftrace output so that we have a real chance of logging these things
> > and being able to go look at something about them down the line.
> 
> How exactly woudl that work?  Would that work as a *replacement* for
> filling up the logs as I was recommending?  If so I'm all for it...

I think it would be a replacement for dmesg, at least.  

-- Dave

--
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/