From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Jan 25 04:49:26 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0F5316A4CE
	for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Tue, 25 Jan 2005 04:49:26 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from web52704.mail.yahoo.com (web52704.mail.yahoo.com
	[206.190.39.155])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2077443D31
	for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Tue, 25 Jan 2005 04:49:26 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from kamalpr@yahoo.com)
Received: (qmail 1571 invoked by uid 60001); 25 Jan 2005 04:49:24 -0000
Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
	s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
	b=Lc43Bq5+0aSkQ2Pg2XoS/pkuN+jOeJM/BEc0TRLriJ5NOVFz+AE5pW5RYMajYz4VdpsABdimoHm4jG1SD3OFJpO+mkRThRdKbTUjCCYLSH3NREnLA8I3idT2I0Skp1mk4EKemK27DN6HPMyUBnpU+3nGulPwFGmQ9e1t/qSP44k=
	;
Message-ID: <20050125044924.1568.qmail@web52704.mail.yahoo.com>
Received: from [203.195.199.244] by web52704.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP;
	Mon, 24 Jan 2005 20:49:24 PST
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 20:49:24 -0800 (PST)
From: "Kamal R. Prasad" <kamalpr@yahoo.com>
To: hackers@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSI.4.58L.0501241423530.27294@vp4.netgate.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Subject: Re: Resuming from a crashdump
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
Reply-To: kamalp@acm.org
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 04:49:26 -0000


--- ctodd@chrismiller.com wrote:

[snip]
> 
> Well booting the kernel generally takes little time,
> but if all the
> processes could be restored this would be a step in
> the right direction.

If restoring a previously executing program can
recover some *context*, then it makes sense to
restore. If you want to restore a process just to save
bringup time -that is a different issue.

> As John said, restoring the state of some programs
> will have to rely on
> the program, but perhaps this could lead to an API
> of some sort that would
> make this less painful on the program author.

I am working on this with the author of checkpointing
in dragonfly (Kip Macy). Basically, the program author
will decide when to save the context of a process and
it will depend on how it interacts with the system.
Saving a shadow copy of the kernel is rather
difficult.

regards
-kamal



		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. 
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail