Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] fork: Add the ability to create tasks with given pids

[Kay Sievers]

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 17:44, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 8:30 AM, Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I think that systemd guys can play with it. E.g. respawning daemons with predefined
>>>> pids sounds like an interesting thing to play with.
>>>
>>> But wouldn't CAP_CHECKPOINT be enough for systemd?
>>
>> It would, but what's the point in granting to a systemd (which can be a container's
>> init by the way) the ability to use the _whole_ checkpoint/restore engine?
>
> Christ, stop making it sound like we would *want* systemd to do even
> more odd things.
>
> Quite frankly, any feature that is sold with ".. and systemd can use
> this fox Xyz", is a *misfeature* in my opinion. ÂCore infrastructure
> like systemd should use a *minimal* interface, not some random
> extended features.

No worries, there is no plan from the systemd maintainers side to use
or need predictable PIDs. We still start, stop and restart service the
old-school way, and will leave checkpoint/restart to somebody else. :)

Kay
--
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/