Re: Software Suspend Functionality in 2.5

[Suparna Bhattacharya <suparna@in.ibm.com>]

On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 02:05:48PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > Since we've had to work on a solution that can be used 
> > for accurate non-disruptive dumps as well as crash dumps
> > (the latter using kexec), I was wondering whether it 
> > was worth exploring possibilities of commonality with 
> > swsusp down the line ... I know its not probably not 
> > something very immediate, but just an indication on 
> > whether we should keep applicability for swsusp (probably 
> > reuse and share ideas/code back and forth between the 
> > two efforts) in mind as we move forward. Because we 
> > have to support a more restrictive situation when it 
> > comes to dumping, it just may be usable by swsusp too 
> > if we can get it right.
> 
> Well, less code duplication is always welcome. But notice we need
> *atomic* snapshots in swsusp, else we might corrupt data.

Atomic snapshots are what we'd like for dump too, since we desire 
accurate dumps (minimum drift), so its not a conflicting requirement. 
The difference is that while you could do i/o (e.g to flush pages 
to free up memory) before initiating an atomic snapshot, we can't.

Regards
Suparna

-- 
Suparna Bhattacharya (suparna@in.ibm.com)
Linux Technology Center
IBM Software Labs, India