All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nigel Cunningham <nigel@nigel.suspend2.net>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: vgoyal@in.ibm.com, Jeremy Maitin-Shepard <jbms@cmu.edu>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Subject: Re: A kexec approach to hibernation
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 18:14:34 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1180944874.27018.2.camel@nigel.suspend2.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200706041005.42092.rjw@sisk.pl>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1927 bytes --]

Hi again.

On Mon, 2007-06-04 at 10:05 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, 4 June 2007 07:22, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > Hi.
> > 
> > I can see that the idea of writing a kernel image from using another
> > kernel sounds nice and clean initially, but the more we get into the
> > details (yes, I am listening, even though I said nothing before now),
> > the more it's sounding like the cure is worse than the disease.
> > 
> > To get rid of process freezing, we're talking about:
> > * making hibernation depend on depriving the user of 32 or 64M of
> > otherwise perfectly usable memory (thereby making hibernation on
> > machines with less memory impossible)
> > * requiring them to set up kexec or kdump (I don't understand the
> > difference, sorry) or some new variation
> > * adding interfaces to tell kexec/dump/whatever what pages need to be
> > saved and reloaded
> > * adding convolutions in which at resume time we boot one kernel, switch
> > to another kernel to do the loading and then switch back again to the
> > resumed kernel (assuming I understand what you're suggesting).
> > 
> > It all sounds terribly complicated and confusing to me, and that's
> > before I even begin to think about how this second kernel could possibly
> > write the image to an encrypted device or LVM or such like that the
> > first kernel knows about and might use now.
> > 
> > Can't we just get the freezer right and be done with it?
> 
> My feelings about this are pretty much the same. :-)
> 
> At least, there still is room for improvements within the current approach,
> so first I'd like to improve it as much as reasonably possible and then to
> think of alternatives, if need be.

Agreed. I'm not for a moment denying that the current freezer could be
better, but biffing it out the window just doesn't seem to be the
appropriate solution at the moment.

Regards,

Nigel

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2007-06-04  8:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-06-01 20:39 A kexec approach to hibernation Jeremy Maitin-Shepard
2007-06-01 21:39 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-06-01 22:25   ` Jeremy Maitin-Shepard
2007-06-01 23:14     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-06-01 23:54       ` Jeremy Maitin-Shepard
2007-06-02  0:33         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-06-02  1:54           ` Jeremy Maitin-Shepard
2007-06-02  9:22             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-06-04 10:46             ` Pavel Machek
2007-06-04 12:20               ` Matthew Garrett
2007-06-04 13:10                 ` Pavel Machek
2007-06-04 13:16                   ` Matthew Garrett
2007-06-11  2:02                     ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-06-11 22:44                       ` Nigel Cunningham
2007-06-04 22:09               ` Jeremy Maitin-Shepard
2007-06-04 22:36                 ` Nigel Cunningham
2007-06-05  8:15                   ` Xavier Bestel
2007-06-05  9:34                     ` Stefan Seyfried
2007-06-05  9:40                       ` Xavier Bestel
2007-06-04 22:51                 ` Pavel Machek
2007-06-11 15:07                   ` Jeremy Maitin-Shepard
2007-06-11  3:40             ` Nigel Cunningham
2007-06-11 15:01               ` Jeremy Maitin-Shepard
2007-06-11 15:45                 ` Xavier Bestel
2007-06-11 15:51                   ` Jeremy Maitin-Shepard
2007-06-11 16:03                     ` Xavier Bestel
2007-06-11 17:05                       ` Jeremy Maitin-Shepard
2007-06-04  4:40         ` Vivek Goyal
2007-06-04  5:22           ` Nigel Cunningham
2007-06-04  8:05             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-06-04  8:14               ` Nigel Cunningham [this message]
2007-06-04 21:44             ` Jeremy Maitin-Shepard

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1180944874.27018.2.camel@nigel.suspend2.net \
    --to=nigel@nigel.suspend2.net \
    --cc=jbms@cmu.edu \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
    --cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
    --cc=vgoyal@in.ibm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.