Re: Back to the future.

Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-04-28T01:04:31Z

On Saturday, 28 April 2007 03:00, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2007 at 05:18:16PM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>
> > Then you could use kexec for resume...
>
> While that would certainly be nifty, I think we're arguably starting
> from the wrong point here. Why are we booting a kernel, trying to poke
> the hardware back into some sort of mock-quiescent state, freeing memory
> and then (finally) overwriting the entire contents of RAM rather than
> just doing all of this from the bootloader? Given the time spent in
> kernel setup and unpacking initramfs nowadays, I'm willing to bet it'd
> still be faster even if you're stuck using int 13 on x86.

Yes, that would be faster.

> http://apcmag.com/5873/page14 suggests that Intel is looking into this,
> but I haven't heard anything more yet. To the best of my knowledge, this
> is also how Windows manages things.

I think you're right.

Greetings,
Rafael