From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [swsusp] separate snapshot functionality to separate file
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 02:06:58 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20051005000658.GJ18481@elf.ucw.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200510050047.45697.rjw@sisk.pl>
Hi!
> > Well, same cleanup can be done after the split, just as easily.
> >
> > > 3) some cleanups are due before the splitting (eg. function names, the removal
> > > of prepare_suspend_image() etc.),
> >
> > Split does not prevent you from doing the cleanups.
>
> No, it doesn't, but the flow of changes would be easier to follow if the
> cleanups were made first (ie. cleanup -> smaller and simpler code ->
> split).
I wanted to have a "this changes nothing" patch first. Cleanups in
front would be trickier to do because period of "settle down" is
needed before split. We now had quite a long "settle down" period, so
I've seen opportunity to do the split now.
> > No. It needs to be controlled by storage-handling parts, so that
> > snapshot-handling parts become nice library.
>
> You are right, I have confused the sides. I should have said like that:
> The snapshot-handling part makes some functions available to the
...
> part need not care for what happens to the pages of data send to the
> storage-handling parts as long as it can receive them back in the same
> order in which they have been sent.
Nicely said.
> > That is ugly. snapshot needs to be called from storage handling parts,
> > and then interface can become much simpler:
> >
> > struct pbe *sys_snapshot();
> >
> > snapshots a system, then you can save it in any way you want. And
> >
> > void sys_restore(struct pbe *);
> >
> > . Simple, eh?
>
> Well, aren't there any problems with handling kernel addresses from the user
> space and vice versa?
Nothing we could not handle. Kernel needs to use get_user, while
userspace needs to seek/read/write on /dev/kmem (when accessing "the
other" addresses).
> Anyway, I think on resume we should send data from the user space to the
> kernel and let the kernel arrange them in memory instead of placing them in
> memory directly from the used space. By symmetry, on suspend we should send
> data from the kernel to the user space instead of allowing the users space
> to read memory at will. IMO the arrangement of the data in memory should
> not be visible to the user space at all.
I thought about that -- user/kernel interface would certainly be nicer
-- but I do not think it is feasible without writing a lot of code.
[I agree that assymetry I have in there is ugly, but I don't see a way
to do alloc_pagedir() in userspace, and I'd like to keep page
relocation in userspace.]
> Still I'm afraid in the future we'll be moving some functions between
> snapshot.c and swsusp.c back and forth ...
We may have to move function or two, but I think nothing too dramatic
will happen.
Pavel
--
if you have sharp zaurus hardware you don't need... you know my address
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-10-05 0:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-10-02 23:13 [swsusp] separate snapshot functionality to separate file Pavel Machek
2005-10-03 21:39 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2005-10-03 23:17 ` Pavel Machek
2005-10-04 15:11 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2005-10-04 20:53 ` Pavel Machek
2005-10-04 22:34 ` Nigel Cunningham
2005-10-05 8:41 ` Pavel Machek
2005-10-05 21:21 ` Lorenzo Colitti
2005-10-05 22:21 ` Nigel Cunningham
2005-10-05 22:44 ` Pavel Machek
2005-10-05 22:54 ` Lorenzo Colitti
2005-10-05 22:57 ` Pavel Machek
2005-10-05 23:00 ` Pavel Machek
2005-10-05 23:18 ` Lorenzo Colitti
2005-10-06 10:10 ` Alon Bar-Lev
2005-10-06 8:20 ` Pavel Machek
2005-10-09 23:41 ` Nigel Cunningham
2005-10-04 22:47 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2005-10-05 0:06 ` Pavel Machek [this message]
2005-10-05 8:20 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2005-10-05 8:33 ` Pavel Machek
2005-10-06 8:23 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2005-10-06 10:42 ` Pavel Machek
2005-10-06 13:29 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
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=20051005000658.GJ18481@elf.ucw.cz \
--to=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
/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