From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2011 10:29:11 +0200 From: Martin Schwidefsky Subject: Re: [patch 1/1] [PATCH] include storage keys in hibernation image. Message-ID: <20110708102911.3c4d83b6@mschwide> In-Reply-To: <201107072336.26151.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <20110608074523.211912903@de.ibm.com> <201106142250.15041.rjw@sisk.pl> <20110615093629.07f01779@mschwide> <201107072336.26151.rjw@sisk.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Archive: List-Post: To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Pavel Machek , Jiri Slaby , Len Brown List-ID: On Thu, 7 Jul 2011 23:36:25 +0200 "Rafael J. Wysocki" wrote: > On Wednesday, June 15, 2011, Martin Schwidefsky wrote: > > On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 22:50:14 +0200 > > "Rafael J. Wysocki" wrote: > ... > > > > Well before the preallocation kicked in we don't know which are the relevant > > storage keys. The only other option would be to store all of them which I > > consider to be a inferior solution. > > I've been thinking about that recently a bit. > > Don't we need to restore the keys of the page frames that aren't copied > into the image too? Pages that are free (= not part of the image) will get a zero storage key once they are allocated again. So no, we do not need to include these keys into the hibernation image. -- blue skies, Martin. "Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.