public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox