[lxc-devel] [RFC][PATCH][lxc]: unfreeze while stopping

[Sukadev Bhattiprolu]

Michel Normand [normand at fr.ibm.com] wrote:
| Le mardi 08 juin 2010 à 19:07 -0700, Sukadev Bhattiprolu a écrit :
| > I am not too sure, but if user wants to stop a container is there a
| > reason not to implicitly unfreeze the container and stop ?
| > 
| > ---
| > From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev at linux.vnet.ibm.com>
| > Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 18:42:00 -0700
| > Subject: [PATCH 1/1]: unfreeze while stopping container
| > 
| > When a container is being stopped, it must also be unfrozen after posting
| > the SIGKILL. Otherwise if the container is frozen when the SIGKILL is posted,
| > the SIGKILL will remain pending and the lxc-stop command will block until
| > lxc-unfreeze is explicitly called).
| 
| For me the lxc-start/lxc-stop and
| lxc-freeze/lxc-unfreeze are two sets of commands
| that should not be mixed.
| 
| If the container was previously frozen by a lxc-freeze
| then the user has to issue a lxc-unfreeze before to issue the lxc-stop.

Ok, if that is the design, then we should change the lxc_stop_callback()
to send an answer even on success ? Currently on successful stop it expects
the socket to close, which will unblock the waiting lxc_stop() caller.

But if the container is frozen the lxc_stop() caller waits indefinitely.
Its not an issue for the lxc-stop command, but is an issue when
lxc-checkpoint calls lxc_stop() (in response to the --kill option).

Sukadev