On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Nigel Cunningham wrote:It certainly isn't. On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Nigel Cunningham wrote: You don't need to modify other programs. You just need to display the progress bar and block _user input_. I don't even claim to know X, but I would be extremely surprised if you technically can't say "don't let the user touch any other windows except this one." The user couldn't care less whether tasks are frozen or not by the kernel. What matters is that the user can't shoot himself in the foot while snapshotting. Furthermore, we probably do need to do other things to ensure safety, like remounting filesystems read-only but again, this has nothing to do with snapshotting per se. What the kernel needs to worry about is (1) providing an atomic snapshot that is consistent and (2) resuming to that snapshot safely. If the _user_ loses data that was generated between snapshot + shutdown, it's absolutely no concern for the snapshot operation! On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Nigel Cunningham wrote: But you just explained how we can! We shouldn't bend over backwards for snapshotting just because the filesystems don't currently support something we need. On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Nigel Cunningham wrote: Don't worry, I am used to cold water :-). Pekka -
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 001/196] Chinese: Add the known_regression URI to the HOWTO |
| Andy Whitcroft | clam |
| Vladislav Bolkhovitin | Re: Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel |
git: | |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Evgeniy Polyakov | Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
