From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753794AbZDMHj0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Apr 2009 03:39:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752352AbZDMHjQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Apr 2009 03:39:16 -0400 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.154]:11947 "EHLO fg-out-1718.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752225AbZDMHjQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Apr 2009 03:39:16 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=jGhpxCxXGJqdXIYAAKen5cBlRzxUFKYp3BvelIbD3NaiGd+H8GnGBC1tWuIw4zRilu wuNgy272S+rh7vOC7AT0i2zHeM4Am/NWvXpJ7WNRlD+zvWzGBLwhmkoqmBdF70wq7v3c Mrh188Lc3/jwKhFRdHpBeRVHI33CS+v8hBRaE= Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 11:39:25 +0400 From: Alexey Dobriyan To: Linus Torvalds Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, xemul@parallels.com, serue@us.ibm.com, dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com, mingo@elte.hu, orenl@cs.columbia.edu, hch@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/30] C/R OpenVZ/Virtuozzo style Message-ID: <20090413073925.GB7085@x200.localdomain> References: <20090410023207.GA27788@x200.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 08:06:55AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Fri, 10 Apr 2009, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > > > > This is to show how we see C/R and to provoke discussion on number of > > important issues (mounts, ...). > > My only initial reaction is that I absolutely hate the naming (not to say > I love the code - just to say that I didn't even look at it, because I got > hung up on the name). > > "cr"? It could be anything. I realize that to _you_ that is meaningful, > but to somebody less specifically interested in checkpoint-restore 'cr' > means 'carriage return' or just doesn't really say anything at all. Well, in OpenVZ everything is in kernel/cpt/ and prefixed with "cpt_" and "rst_". And I think "cr_" is super nice prefix: it's short, it's C-like, it reminds about restart part. Eventually, C/R will become standard in-kernel thing everyone should be at least aware of, so it's like learning what "vma" means. > That goes both for file naming (kernel/cr/xyzzy.c) and to a lesser degree > for function naming too. I also don't think it makes sense to have > something like kernel/cr/cr-x86_32.c or kernel/cr/cr-tty.c - maybe that is > good right now, but I sure hope that the long-term goal is to have these > things in the code that will need to change them when the code gets > updated (ie arch/x86/kernel and drivers/char/) In the long run, yes, C/R should be moved closer to core code it tries to checkpoint. Right now, however, doing "make kernel/cr/" is much quicker and C/R can not do much, so it's unclear how exactly splitting should be done.