Re: Callbacks

From: Paul H. Hargrove (PHHargrove_at_lbl_dot_gov)
Date: Wed Feb 23 2005 - 10:29:47 PST

  • Next message: Paul H. Hargrove: "Re: Callbacks"
    If *any* caller of cr_checkpoint() indicates a failure 
    checkpoint will be taken.  The assumption is that each callback is 
    managing some important resource that the process will not be able to 
    restart without.  Thus we assume that they must all succeed or the 
    checkpoint is unusable.
    In the TEMP case, the process is returned to a running state.  In the 
    PERM case the process is aborted.
    Michael Klemm wrote:
    > Hash: SHA1
    > Hi,
    > Paul H. Hargrove wrote:
    > | Micheal,
    > |   Ulisses is correct, our design uses a single callback for
    > | "checkpoint", "continue after taking checkpoint" and "restart from
    > | checkpoint".  The later two cases are to be distiguished by the value
    > | returned from cr_checkpoint().
    > Ah... OK. After re-reading the headers and getting an example to work I
    > understand that fact.  Afterall, I can assume that each callback routine
    > has to call cr_checkpoint to allow BLCR to proceed to the next phase
    > during checkpoint. If just one callback denies, the whole process is
    > terminated. Right?
    >     -michael
    > - --
    > Computer Science Department 2, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg
    > Martensstrasse 3, D-91058 Erlangen, Germany
    > phone: ++49 (0)9131 85-28995, fax: ++49 (0)9131 85-28809
    > web:
    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    > Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
    > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -
    > iD8DBQFCHKC6WEu1syWqdn0RAhJrAJ4keLooppgePd+WwT/7IygkMCRv6QCcDAgp
    > GrtWWmxtBBIHaMX6hw72Gp4=
    > =YD0J
    > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Paul H. Hargrove                          PHHargrove_at_lbl_dot_gov
    Future Technologies Group                 
    HPC Research Department                   Tel: +1-510-495-2352
    Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory     Fax: +1-510-486-6900

  • Next message: Paul H. Hargrove: "Re: Callbacks"