From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@in.ibm.com>
To: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: nigel@nigel.suspend2.net,
Kexec Mailing List <kexec@lists.infradead.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org,
Jeremy Maitin-Shepard <jbms@cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2 -mm] kexec based hibernation
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 12:16:04 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070827064604.GD9809@in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1188195529.3247.82.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com>
On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 02:18:49PM +0800, Huang, Ying wrote:
[..]
> >
> > If one compiles the kernel C to boot from reserved memory area (subset
> > of memory area used by kernel B), then I can skip the step of kexecing
> > from C to D? (COFIG_PHYSICAL_START)
>
> Yes. I think so.
>
> > Alternatively, can we give hint to kernel C to run from a specified address
> > at run time with the help of command line parameters. What I mean boot-loader
> > can load the kernel at any address, but kernel will move itself to run
> > from a different location depending on command line parameter. For example,
> > let say kernel_run_addr = 0x1000000. This parameter will tell the kernel
> > to move itself to 16MB address and run from there. I think it can be made
> > to work with little work in existing setup of relocatable kernel.
> >
> > Kernel run address can be put by some user space script which will save
> > the hibernated image of original kernel. So after saving the /proc/vmcore,
> > script can modify the boot loader config file to append the right
> > command line to the kernel (kernel_run_addr).
> >
> > After hibernation, user will shutdown/reboot. Next time the kernel boots
> > it will load at 16MB addr (because of kernel_run_addr) and then it can
> > restore the previously saved image.
> >
> > We shall have to get rid of (kernel_run_addr) parameter from command
> > line while resuming. One can restore the image (krestore) and then edit
> > the boot loader config file to get rid of command line param, kernel_run_addr.
> >
> > In this scheme, with the help of relocatable kernel, we can use a single
> > kernel for everything. (A, B, C, D). We will also avoid additional kexec
> > from kernel C to kernel D.
> >
> > I think in the long run we shall have to work out so that a user does
> > not have to maintain multiple kernels.
>
> Only one relocatable kernel image is needed. In fact, I use one
> relocatable kernel image in testing during development.
>
> > Does this make sense?
>
> Yes, this is a sensible optimization. But I think it may be better to
> make bootloader load kernel D directly into a specified memory location.
> For example, we can add a option to "kernel" command of grub.
>
IIUC, you mean a command line option which is parsed by boot-loader and
then boot-loader loads the kernel at user specified address?
I think it might not be a very good idea as hibernation becomes boot-loader
dependent scheme. How many boot-loaders will one modify and hibernation
will not work with older versions of boot-loader.
I think it is better to make kernel relocate to user specified address and
keep hibernation mechanism independent of specific boot-loader(grup, lilo,...)
and boot-loader version.
Thanks
Vivek
_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@in.ibm.com>
To: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
nigel@nigel.suspend2.net,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Jeremy Maitin-Shepard <jbms@cmu.edu>,
Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org,
Kexec Mailing List <kexec@lists.infradead.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2 -mm] kexec based hibernation
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 12:16:04 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070827064604.GD9809@in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1188195529.3247.82.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com>
On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 02:18:49PM +0800, Huang, Ying wrote:
[..]
> >
> > If one compiles the kernel C to boot from reserved memory area (subset
> > of memory area used by kernel B), then I can skip the step of kexecing
> > from C to D? (COFIG_PHYSICAL_START)
>
> Yes. I think so.
>
> > Alternatively, can we give hint to kernel C to run from a specified address
> > at run time with the help of command line parameters. What I mean boot-loader
> > can load the kernel at any address, but kernel will move itself to run
> > from a different location depending on command line parameter. For example,
> > let say kernel_run_addr = 0x1000000. This parameter will tell the kernel
> > to move itself to 16MB address and run from there. I think it can be made
> > to work with little work in existing setup of relocatable kernel.
> >
> > Kernel run address can be put by some user space script which will save
> > the hibernated image of original kernel. So after saving the /proc/vmcore,
> > script can modify the boot loader config file to append the right
> > command line to the kernel (kernel_run_addr).
> >
> > After hibernation, user will shutdown/reboot. Next time the kernel boots
> > it will load at 16MB addr (because of kernel_run_addr) and then it can
> > restore the previously saved image.
> >
> > We shall have to get rid of (kernel_run_addr) parameter from command
> > line while resuming. One can restore the image (krestore) and then edit
> > the boot loader config file to get rid of command line param, kernel_run_addr.
> >
> > In this scheme, with the help of relocatable kernel, we can use a single
> > kernel for everything. (A, B, C, D). We will also avoid additional kexec
> > from kernel C to kernel D.
> >
> > I think in the long run we shall have to work out so that a user does
> > not have to maintain multiple kernels.
>
> Only one relocatable kernel image is needed. In fact, I use one
> relocatable kernel image in testing during development.
>
> > Does this make sense?
>
> Yes, this is a sensible optimization. But I think it may be better to
> make bootloader load kernel D directly into a specified memory location.
> For example, we can add a option to "kernel" command of grub.
>
IIUC, you mean a command line option which is parsed by boot-loader and
then boot-loader loads the kernel at user specified address?
I think it might not be a very good idea as hibernation becomes boot-loader
dependent scheme. How many boot-loaders will one modify and hibernation
will not work with older versions of boot-loader.
I think it is better to make kernel relocate to user specified address and
keep hibernation mechanism independent of specific boot-loader(grup, lilo,...)
and boot-loader version.
Thanks
Vivek
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-08-27 6:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-08-27 1:14 [RFC][PATCH 0/2 -mm] kexec based hibernation Huang, Ying
2007-08-27 1:14 ` Huang, Ying
2007-08-27 1:28 ` [linux-pm] " Hu, Fenghua
2007-08-27 2:16 ` Huang, Ying
2007-08-27 2:16 ` [linux-pm] " Huang, Ying
2007-08-27 2:16 ` Huang, Ying
2007-08-27 2:19 ` Hu, Fenghua
2007-08-27 2:19 ` Hu, Fenghua
2007-08-29 2:41 ` [linux-pm] " Nick Piggin
2007-08-29 2:41 ` Nick Piggin
2007-08-29 2:41 ` Nick Piggin
2007-08-27 1:28 ` Hu, Fenghua
2007-08-27 5:00 ` Vivek Goyal
2007-08-27 5:00 ` Vivek Goyal
2007-08-27 6:18 ` Huang, Ying
2007-08-27 6:18 ` Huang, Ying
2007-08-27 6:18 ` Huang, Ying
2007-08-27 6:46 ` Vivek Goyal
2007-08-27 6:46 ` Vivek Goyal [this message]
2007-08-27 6:46 ` Vivek Goyal
2007-08-27 7:53 ` Pavel Machek
2007-08-27 7:53 ` Pavel Machek
2007-08-27 7:53 ` Pavel Machek
2007-08-27 13:05 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-08-27 13:05 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-08-27 13:15 ` Pavel Machek
2007-08-27 13:15 ` Pavel Machek
2007-08-27 13:15 ` Pavel Machek
2007-08-28 1:24 ` Huang, Ying
2007-08-28 1:24 ` Huang, Ying
2007-08-27 13:05 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-08-27 5:00 ` Vivek Goyal
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-08-27 1:14 Huang, Ying
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=20070827064604.GD9809@in.ibm.com \
--to=vgoyal@in.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=jbms@cmu.edu \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=nigel@nigel.suspend2.net \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.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.