From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nigel Cunningham Subject: Re: [PATH 0/1] Kexec jump - v2 - the first step to kexec based hibernation Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 12:15:04 +1000 Message-ID: <200707191215.05245.nigel@nigel.suspend2.net> References: <1184483593.1898.98.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com> <20070718180420.02352d4f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Reply-To: nigel@suspend2.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4724294145971243587==" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20070718180420.02352d4f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Mime-version: 1.0 Sender: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Andrew Morton Cc: david@lang.hm, Kexec Mailing List , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Eric W. Biederman" , Pavel Machek , "Huang, Ying" , linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, Jeremy Maitin-Shepard List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org --===============4724294145971243587== Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart2351488.ktMTUd6rUM"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --nextPart2351488.ktMTUd6rUM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="cp 850" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Hi. On Thursday 19 July 2007 11:04:20 Andrew Morton wrote: > On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 15:13:13 +0800 > "Huang, Ying" wrote: >=20 > >=20 > > The changelog between v1 and v2 > >=20 > > 1. The kexec jump implementation is put into the kexec/kdump > > framework instead of software suspend framework. The device > > and CPU state save/restore code of software suspend is called > > when needed. > >=20 > > 2. The same code path is used for both kexec a new kernel and jump > > back to original kernel. >=20 > I like the idea but I think I'll let people chat about it a bit more > before looking at merging the patches, OK? Please wait until you see a complete implementation that actually works. I'= m=20 sitting here quietly, following (and now breaking) the "If you can't say=20 anything positive, don't say anything at all" line because I think that the= =20 more into the implementation details people get, the uglier this is going t= o=20 show itself to be. I'm perfectly willing to be proven wrong, but haven't se= en=20 anything so far that's even begun to convince me otherwise. Regards, Nigel =2D-=20 See http://www.tuxonice.net for Howtos, FAQs, mailing lists, wiki and bugzilla info. --nextPart2351488.ktMTUd6rUM Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBGnskpN0y+n1M3mo0RAge8AJoCwiUagG8l1xI7rk+vYajJQgkt+wCg6QPU PRSGoff64GJ4SvF1YCkgYBg= =2IrP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2351488.ktMTUd6rUM-- --===============4724294145971243587== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline --===============4724294145971243587==--